http://orthodoxwiki.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Vandrona&feedformat=atomOrthodoxWiki - User contributions [en]2015-03-03T23:12:40ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.18.0http://orthodoxwiki.org/Church_of_RussiaChurch of Russia2008-07-21T18:21:16Z<p>Vandrona: /* Reforms */ (typo)</p>
<hr />
<div>{{church|<br />
name= Patriarchate of Moscow[[Image:Russia logo.gif|center|Church of Russia]]|<br />
founder= [[Apostle Andrew]], St. [[Vladimir of Kiev]]|<br />
independence= 1448 |<br />
recognition= 1589 by [[Church of Constantinople|Constantinople]] |<br />
primate=[[Alexei II (Ridiger) of Moscow|Patriarch Alexei II]]|<br />
hq=Moscow, Russia|<br />
territory=Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, some former Soviet republics|<br />
possessions= United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, China|<br />
language=[[Church Slavonic]]|<br />
music=[[Russian Chant]]|<br />
calendar=[[Julian Calendar|Julian]]|<br />
population=90,000,000[http://www.cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg.aspx?eccpageID=17]|<br />
website=[http://www.mospat.ru/ Church of Russia]<br />
}}<br />
The '''Church of Russia''', also referred to as the '''Moscow Patriarchate''', is one of the [[autocephalous]] Orthodox churches, ranking fifth after [[Church of Constantinople|Constantinople]], [[Church of Alexandria|Alexandria]], [[Church of Antioch|Antioch]], and [[Church of Jerusalem|Jerusalem]]. It exercises [[jurisdiction]] over Orthodox Christians in Russia and the surrounding Slavic lands as well as [[exarchate]]s and patriarchal representation churches around the world. It also exercises jurisdiction over the autonomous [[Church of Japan]] and Orthodox Christians in China. The Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia is currently His Holiness [[Alexei II (Ridiger) of Moscow|Alexei II]].<br />
<br />
==Jurisdiction==<br />
According to the statutes of the Russian Orthodox Church, its jurisdiction includes persons of Orthodox confession living on the [[canonical territory]] of the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldavia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Estonia, and also Orthodox Christians living in other countries who voluntarily join the jurisdiction.<br />
<br />
This includes these self-governing churches:<br />
*The [[Church of Estonia (Moscow Patriarchate)|Estonian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate)]] <br />
*The [[Latvian Orthodox Church]] <br />
*The [[Moldovan Orthodox Church|Orthodox Church of Moldova]] <br />
*The [[Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia]]<br />
*The [[Church of Ukraine|Ukrainian Orthodox Church]]<br />
<br />
The self-governing churches receive their [[chrism]] from the Patriarch of Moscow and exercise their activities on the basis of patriarchal [[tomos]]. This claim of jurisdiction is disputed by other Orthodox churches in a number of cases (particularly in Estonia and Moldova, as well as in the [[diaspora]]; there are also major schismatic elements in Ukraine that want an [[autocephaly|autocephalous]] Ukrainian church), due mainly to the changing shape of the boundaries of Russia. The canonical territory of the Russian church is not clearly defined&amp;mdash;the 1593 Council of Constantinople which confirmed its [[autocephaly]] defined it as the territory of &quot;Moscow, Russia, and all the Northern Lands.&quot;<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
{{cleanup}}<br />
According to tradition, St. [[Apostle Andrew|Andrew]] the First-Called, while preaching the [[gospel]], stopped at the Kievan hills to bless the future city of Kiev. But it was [[Photius the Great|Photius]], Patriarch of Constantinople (858-861‚ 878-886), who first initiated missionary work on a large scale among these Slavs. <br />
<br />
===[[Conversion]] of the Slavs=== <br />
The Kievan-Rus' empire (present day Ukraine, Belarus and Russia) was blessed with the work of Ss. [[Cyril and Methodius]] [[Equal-to-the-Apostles]], the [[Illuminator]]s of the Slavs. Although their work was around 863 in Moravia (roughly equivalent to the modern [[Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia|Slovakia]]), the benefit was to all the Slavic lands (particularly [[Church of Bulgaria|Bulgaria]], [[Church of Serbia|Serbia]], Ukraine, Belarus' and Russia).<br />
<br />
===The Kiev period (988-1237)=== <br />
Cyril and Methodius not only brought Christianity in a common language, they brought Byzantium. The Slavs received a fully articulated system of Christian doctrine and a fully developed Christian civilization. The age of the [[Ecumenical Councils|Seven Councils]] was complete and the doctrines of the [[Trinity]] and the [[Incarnation]] had already been worked out. Because people were preached to in their own tongue, and of taking services in Slavonic, they truly could make Christianity their own. <br />
<br />
Around 864 Patriarch Photius sent a bishop to Kiev(capital of present day Ukraine), but this was stopped by Oleg, who assumed power at Kiev (the chief Rus' city at this time) in 878. Christian ideas from Byzantium, Bulgaria, and Scandinavia, still came into Kievan-Rus'. <br />
<br />
In 954 Princess [[Olga of Kiev|Ol'ha (Olga) of Kiev]] was baptized. This paved the way for what is called the greatest events in the history of the Ukarainian and Russian church, the baptism of [[Vladimir of Kiev]] and the [[Baptism of Rus']] in 988. Olga's grandson Vladimir (reigned 980-1015) was converted to Christianity and married Anna, the sister of the Byzantine Emperor. Orthodoxy became the State religion of Rus', and eventually Russia until 1917. (Rus' was not completely converted to Christianity at this time, and the Church was at first restricted mainly to the cities, while much of the countryside remained pagan until the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.) <br />
<br />
The 10th and 11th centuries majestic churches and monasteries were built. St. [[Anthony of the Caves]] brought the traditions of [[Mount Athos|Athonite]] monasticism to Rus' (present day Ukraine) in 1051.<br />
<br />
The Orthodox Church during the Kievan period was subject to Constantinople, and until 1237 the Metropolitans of Rus' were usually Greek. The Rus' Church continues to sing in Greek the solemn greeting to a bishop, ''eis polla eti, despota'' (&quot;Many years to you, Master&quot;), in memory of the days when the metropolitan came from Constantinople. Most of the rest of the bishops were native Ukrainians or Russians.<br />
<br />
===Mongol Tartars over Russia (1237-1448) === <br />
In the 12th century, the period of feudal divisions, the Kievan-Rus' Church (present day Ukraine) remained the only bearer of the idea of unity of the people, resisting the centrifugal aspirations and feudal strife among Rus' princes. Even the Tartar invasion, this greatest ever misfortune that struck Rus' in the 13th century, failed to break the Orthodox Church. The Church managed to survive as a real force and was the comforter of the people in their plight. It made a great spiritual, material and moral contribution to the restoration of the political unity of Russia as a guarantee of its future victory over the invaders. <br />
<br />
Also, at this same time, the Grand Duke Alexander of Novgorod, won a great victory on the banks of the Neva' over the Swedes, who had been incited by the Pope to conquer Russia for the Latin Church.<br />
<br />
The Russia which emerged from the Mongol period was a Russia greatly changed in outward appearance. Kiev never recovered from the sack of Batu, a grandson of Genghis Khan, in 1240, and its place was taken in the fourteenth century by the Principality of Moscow. It was the Grand Dukes of Moscow who inspired the resistance to the Mongols and who led Russia at Kulikovo. The rise of Moscow was closely bound up with the Church. When the town was still small and comparatively unimportant, [[Peter of Moscow|Peter]], Metropolitan of Russia from 1308 to 1326, decided to settle there; and henceforward it remained the city of the chief hierarch of Russia. <br />
<br />
(This period in the history of the Russian Church included [[Alexander Nevsky]] and [[Sergius of Radonezh]], both saints.)<br />
<br />
[[Image:Rublev Trinity.jpg|right|thumb|The [[Hospitality of Abraham]]]]Russian principalities began to unite around Moscow in the 14th century. The Russian Orthodox Church continued to play an important role in the revival of unified Russia. Outstanding Russian bishops acted as spiritual guides and assistants to the Princes of Moscow. St. Metropolitan [[Alexis of Moscow|Alexis]] (1354-1378) educated Prince Dimitry Donskoy. He, just as St. Metropolitan Jonas (1448-1471) later, by the power of his authority helped the Prince of Moscow to put an end to the feudal discords and preserve the unity of the state. St. [[Sergius of Radonezh]], a great ascetic of the Russian Church, gave his blessing to Prince Dimitry Donskoy to fight the Kulikovo Battle which made the beginning of the liberation of Russia from the invaders. <br />
<br />
During these years, Russian painters indigenized the iconographic traditions which they had received from the Eastern Christian Empire. Icon painting flourished above all among the spiritual children of Saint Sergius. One of the finest of all Orthodox icons, from the artistic point of view, the Holy Trinity Icon, by Saint [[Andrei Rublev]] (1370?-1430?) is from this period.<br />
<br />
===Autocephalous Russian Church===<br />
Liberating itself from the invaders, the Russian state gathered strength and so did the Russian Orthodox Church. In 1448, not long before the Byzantine Empire collapsed, the Russian Church became independent from the [[Ecumenical Patriarchate]]. Metropolitan Jonas, installed by the Council of Russian bishops in 1448, was given the title of Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia. <br />
<br />
The Russian Church thus gained its independence, more by chance than from any deliberate design. Hitherto the Patriarch of Constantinople had appointed the head of the Russian Church, the Metropolitan. At the [[Council of Florence]] the Metropolitan was a Greek, Isidore. A leading supporter of the union with Rome, Isidore returned to Moscow in 1441 and proclaimed the decrees of Florence, but he met with no support from the Russians. He was imprisoned by the Grand Duke, but after a time was allowed to escape, and went back to Italy. The chief [[see]] was thus left vacant; but the Russians could not ask the Patriarch for a new Metropolitan, because until 1453 the official Church at Constantinople continued to accept the Florentine Union. Reluctant to take action on their own, the Russians delayed for several years. Eventually in 1448 a council of Russian bishops proceeded to elect a Metropolitan without further reference to Constantinople. After 1453, when the Florentine Union was abandoned at Constantinople, communion between the Patriarchate and Russia was restored, but Russia continued to appoint its own chief hierarch. Henceforward the Russian Church was self-governing, but its autocephaly was not ratified by the rest of the Church until 1589.<br />
<br />
After the [[fall of Constantinople]] in 1453, there was only one nation that saw itself as capable of assuming leadership in Eastern Christendom. The growing might of the Russian state also contributed to the growing authority of the autocephalous Russian Church. To the Russian people, it was a sign from God, that at the very moment when the Byzantine Empire was ending, they themselves were throwing off the few remaining vestiges of Tartar control. To them, Moscow became the [[Third Rome]], a status never acknowledged by the remainder of the Church but nevertheless which served to inspire Russian Orthodox Christians.<br />
<br />
===Non-Possessors ===<br />
Saint [[Nilus of Sora]] (Nil Sorsky, 1433?-1508), a monk from a remote hermitage in the forests beyond the Volga, launched an attack on the ownership of land by monasteries. Saint Joseph, Abbot of Volokalamsk (1439-1515), replied in defense of monastic landholding. This became known as the dispute between the &quot;Possessors&quot; and the &quot;Non-Possessors&quot;. (Note that both are saints of the Church.)<br />
<br />
As the &quot;Third Rome&quot;, the tsar derived his power and right to rule from being God's chosen representative on earth. So, to keep his status, he needed to protect and promote the church. In the Byzantium tradition, the relationship between the church and the state acted as a check on the power of the tsar. The metropolitan and the tsar were equals, and the metropolitan had the right to censure the tsar. The dispute between the Possessors and the Non-Possessors challenged this idea because about a third of the land in Russia belonged to monasteries at this time. <br />
<br />
The Possessors and the Non-Possessors held different views about the role the church should play in society and in politics. When the Possessors triumphed, the church gained the right to wealth at the expense of political influence. The tsar became superior to the metropolitan, and could now interfere in secular matters of the church. The tsar was cut off from any source of accountability.<br />
Also, behind the question of monastic property lay two different conceptions of the monastic life, and ultimately two different views of the relation of the Church to the world. The Possessors emphasized the social obligations of monasticism. Monks argued that they did not use their wealth on themselves, but to care for the sick and poor, to show hospitality, and to teach. To do these things efficiently, monasteries needed money and therefore they must own land. (Possessors emphasized unity in preaching and worship, beauty and dignity in ritual.) <br />
<br />
The Non-Possessors argued on the other hand that almsgiving is the duty of the laity, while a monk's primary task is to help others by praying for them and by setting an example. To do these things properly a monk must be detached from the world, and only those who are vowed to complete poverty can achieve true detachment. Monks who are landowners cannot avoid being tangled up in secular anxieties, and because they become absorbed in worldly concerns, they act and think in a worldly way. (Non-Possessors were more concerned with freedom in religious practice and taught that God was most pleased with a simple, contrite heart, even in the absence of an elaborate Liturgy. They were the scholars and mystics, who upheld evangelical poverty.)<br />
<br />
===Russian patriarch===<br />
While the Russian people sympathized deeply with the afflictions of their brethren in Constantinople, they did not have sufficient military strength to come to their relief. <br />
<br />
In 1588 the Grand Duke Theodor applied to the Patriarch of Constantinople for permission to form a new Patriarchate for the Russian people. The question was referred to the other Patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, and they all decided that, although the Councils had established five Patriarchates, the exact number was not a matter of divine right, but of ecclesiastical convenience, and consequently, the request could be granted. <br />
<br />
In 1589 Metropolitan Job of Moscow became the first Russian patriarch, and the autocephaly of the Church of Russia was officially acknowledged by the Church. The patriarchs of the ancient churches recognized the Russian patriarch as the fifth in honor, defining the [[canonical territory|canonical boundaries]] of the Church of Russia as being that of the Russian Empire.<br />
<br />
===Reforms===<br />
When [[Nikon of Moscow]] was the primate, the Russian Church was engaged in introducing alterations and amendments into its service books and rites. A great contribution to this was made by Patriarch Nikon, a bright personality and outstanding church reformer. <br />
During the Tartar rule, many mistakes had been made in the service-books, through the ignorance of scribes. Nikon carefully corrected and restored the rites, comparing them with the Greek service books, and introduced many practical reforms. But his zeal made him many enemies, so that at last this great and good man died in exile.<br />
<br />
===Old Believers===<br />
The reforms caused the separation from the Church of those who ignorantly and blindly supposed that the corrupted service-books were divinely inspired. Some [[clergy]]men and [[laity|lay people]] were perhaps more hesitant about accepting the liturgical reforms introduced by Patriarch Nikon and were anathematized by the church authority. These groups became known as the [[Old Believers]], many of whom have now been subsumed into the [[Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia]].<br />
<br />
===The Synodical Church (1700-1917)===<br />
The beginning of the 18th century in Russia was marked by sweeping reforms carried out by Peter I. The reforms did not leave the Russian Church untouched. After the death of Patriarch Adrian in 1700, Peter I delayed the election of the new Primate of the Church because he did not want another Nikon. He established, in 1721, a collective supreme administration known as the Holy and Governing [[holy Synod|Synod]]. The constitution of the Synod was not based on Orthodox Canon Law, but copied from the Protestant ecclesiastical synods in Germany. Its members were not chosen by the Church but nominated by the tsar; and the tsar who nominated could also dismiss them at will. <br />
<br />
The Holy Governing Synod was constituted at St. Petersburg, and consisted of twelve members; four archbishops, six archimandrites, and two arch-priests. This body, was presided over by the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, but subject to the tsar. The Holy Synod rendered an annual account of its affairs through a lay procurator, who in fact governed the Russian Church. Whereas a patriarch, holding office for life, could perhaps defy the tsar, a member of the Holy Synod was allowed no scope for heroism: he was simply retired. The Synod remained the supreme church body in the Russian church for almost two centuries. <br />
<br />
In the Synodal period, the Church paid a special attention to the development of religious education and mission in the provinces. Old churches were restored and new churches were built.<br />
<br />
The Holy Synod consisted of the most influential metropolitans, archbishops and bishops. Moscow itself was administered by a territorial archbishop, combined with Vladimir (1721-1745), with Sevsk (1745-1764), with Kaluga (1764-1799), and then by a metropolitan after it was combined with Kaluga (1799-1917).<br />
<br />
The early Synodical period is sometimes represented as a time of decline, with the Church in complete subservience to the State. It was a time of ill-advised westernization in Church art, Church music, and theology. <br />
<br />
The Synodical period of the nineteenth century, far from being a period of decline; it was a time of great revival in the Russian Church. People turned away from religious and pseudo-religious movements in the contemporary West and fell back once more upon the true spiritual forces of Orthodoxy. With this revival in the spiritual life went a new enthusiasm for missionary work, while in theology, as in spirituality, Orthodoxy freed itself from a slavish imitation of the West. <br />
<br />
During this time, the Russian Church was divided into fifty-eight dioceses, with a bishop at the head of each. These bishops were divided into three metropolias. They were in Kiev, Moscow, and St. Petersburg. <br />
<br />
===20th century the Russian Church=== <br />
<br />
Early in the 20th century the Russian Church began preparations for convening an [[All-Russian Church Council of 1917-1918|All-Russian Council]]. But it was to be convened only after the 1917 Revolution. Among its major actions was the restoration of the patriarchal office in the Russian Church. The Council elected Metropolitan [[Tikhon of Moscow]] Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' (1917-1925). St. Tikhon of Moscow exerted every effort to calm the destructive passions kindled up by the revolution. <br />
<br />
When in 1921-1922 the Soviet government demanded that church valuables be given in aid to the population starving because of the failure of crops in 1921, a conflict erupted between the Church and the new authorities who decided to use this situation to demolish the Church to the end. By the beginning of World War II the church structure was almost completely destroyed throughout the country. There were only a few bishops who remained free and who could perform their duties. Some bishops managed to survive in remote parts or under the disguise of priests. Only a few hundred churches were opened for services throughout the Soviet Union. Most of the clergy were either imprisoned in concentration camps, where many of them perished, or hid in catacombs, while thousands of priests changed occupation. World War II forced Stalin to mobilize all the national resources for defense, including the Russian Orthodox Church as the people's moral force. This process, which can be described as a &quot;patriotic union&quot;, culminated in Stalin's receiving on September 4, 1943, Patriarchal Locum Tenens Metropolitan [[Sergius I (Stragorodsky) of Moscow|Sergiy Stragorodsky]] and Metropolitan [[Alexei I (Simansky) of Moscow|Alexy Simansky]] and [[Nicholas (Yarushevich) of Kiev|Nikolay Yarushevich]].<br />
<br />
==The Russian Orthodox Church today==<br />
{{stub}}<br />
The Russian Orthodox Church claims about 26,000 parishes. Out of these, more than 50% (14,700) are in Ukraine.[http://www.risu.org.ua/library/doc/MP_canter.pdf]<br />
<br />
== Modern Writers ==<br />
*[[Nicholas Afanasiev]]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[List of Primates of Russia]]<br />
<br />
==Sources==<br />
*[http://www.hostkingdom.net/Russia.html#Moscow HostKingdom] <br />
*[http://www.mospat.ru/index.php?lng=1 DECR Communication Service] Communication service of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[http://www.mospat.ru/index.php?lng=1 Church of Russia] official website in English<br />
*[http://www.patriarchia.ru/ Patriarchia.RU] official portal of the Moscow Patriarchate (Russian only)<br />
* [http://www.cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg.aspx?eccpageID=17&amp;IndexView=toc Eastern Christian Churches: The Orthodox Church of Russia] by Ronald Roberson, a Roman Catholic priest and scholar<br />
&lt;!--- * [http://www.pravos.org/index.htm Commission Dialogue Moscow Patriarchate-Church outside Russia] ---&gt;<br />
*[http://www.risu.org.ua/library/doc/MP_canter.pdf Canonical Territory of the Moscow Patriarchate: An Analysis of Contemporary Russian Orthodox Thought], by Fr. J. Buciora, Ph.D. (a paper criticizing the actions of the MP outside Russia)<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxa.org/GB/orthodoxy/canonlaw/russianterritory.htm The Russian Canonical Territory], from the website of the [[Church of Estonia]] (a paper critical of the MP's actions in Estonia)<br />
<br />
{{churches}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Jurisdictions|Russia]]<br />
<br />
[[es:Iglesia Ortodoxa de Rusia]]<br />
[[fr:Église de Russie]]<br />
[[ro:Biserica Ortodoxă Rusă]]<br />
[[ru:Русская Православная Церковь]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Talk:DeaconTalk:Deacon2008-07-05T02:37:43Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Deacon's Etiquette==<br />
it is my understanding that in the greek practise, kissing the hands of deacons was both common and proper, as a sign of respect to the hands that have touched Communion (not for a blessing); whereas it is in the russian practise that kissing the deacon's hands is wrong. can someone verify this before any changes are made? [[User:Pistevo|Pistevo]] 00:14, 16 Jul 2005 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::I can't, of course, speak for all Greeks everywhere, but my understanding is that it is inappropriate to kiss a deacon's hand regardless of ethnic tradition. I am a deacon in the Antiochian Archdiocese, which follows the Greek/Byzantine tradition as a general rule, and kissing the hands of deacons is not done. {{User:Dcndavid/sig}}<br />
<br />
:: I've likewise never seen deacon's hands being kissed, whether in Byzantine or Slavic practice, either here in the US or in the handful of parishes I've been to in the UK. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Dcn. Andrew&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Randompage|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;random&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 08:49, 16 Jul 2005 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Dalmatikon ==<br />
<br />
DcnDavid, if you'd like to give your sources for saying &quot;dalmaticon is just the Latin cognate; similar to calling a phelonion a chasuble&quot;, it could be beneficial. Thanks chrisg 2006-06-21-0909 EAST<br />
<br />
:Well, I suppose I could respond by saying I asked you for citations first, but that wouldn't really help move the discussion along. To be honest, the only place I think I've ever seen the term ''dalmatic'' in print in an Orthodox context is in the Hapgood service book and subsequent works using Hapgood as a source. I've never seen the term ''dalmaticon'' or ''dalmatikon'' anywhere before your edits on this wiki (and a Google search of both terms fails to demonstrate the usage you advocate). <br />
<br />
:Hapgood is, as I described [[Talk:Dalmatikon|here]], a translation from Slavonic into English undertaken by a non-Orthodox translator in the early 20th century. As a translation, it suffers. Hapgood insists on calling the sticharion a dalmatic; Hapgood also refers to the phelonion as a chasuble (e.g., p. xxxviii).<br />
<br />
:As to ''dalmatic'' being a Latin cognate for ''sticharion'', I suppose you could look in any English dictionary with an etymology. Both the OED and the [http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/dalmatic online version of Merriam-Webster] agree that the term derives ultimately from the Latin ''dalmaticus'', meaning Dalmatian or from Dalmatia (as the text of your article entitled [[Dalmatikon]] would seem to indicate).<br />
<br />
:Please note that I don't have a problem of noting the variant usage of ''dalmatic'' (again, apparently, not ''dalmatic/kon'') in the [[Sticharion]] article if you feel it adds to the knowledge base of the audience for OrthodoxWiki. I, myself, am interested to know who among the Orthodox uses this term and how they came to use it, which is why I asked the questions I did on the Dalmatic article's discussion page. I think it is sloppy wikification, however, to have two articles on the same subject under two different titles. I believe ''sticharion'' is the favored term and, thus, should be the main title. Moreover, OrthodoxWiki's [[OrthodoxWiki:Style_Manual#Technical_Terminology|Style Manual]] prefers use of Greek terms where no standard English term predominates. &amp;mdash;[[User:Dcndavid|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Dcn. David&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:Dcndavid|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Contributions/Dcndavid|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 20:39, June 20, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Priests acting as Deacons ==<br />
<br />
Priests in the Orthodox traditions can do anything a deacon can do, except they cannot vest as a deacon. Consequently, when they chant a diaconal litany, they do so from the altar, and do not raise their wing in praise like a deacon does. <br />
<br />
Andrew, I agree with you that in the Latin and Anglican traditions, priests vest as deacons when they perform the role of a deacon at solemn mass or eucharist. Most orthodox find it strange that these priests &quot;pretend&quot; to be deacons by vesting as such. It is almost as if liturgical appearance is more important than the substance of their orders. [[User:Chrisg|Chrisg]] 00:44, July 4, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Well that is sort of what I intended. If there is no deacon serving, the priest does not stand out were the deacon stands for the litanies. Also, parts of the litanies are skipped, like at the Litany of the Catechumens. (And some parts of the quiet prayers in the altar). No big deal. - [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 21:59, July 4, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Communion ==<br />
The article currently states: &quot;A deacon may be blessed by his bishop and parish priest to distribute the Eucharist to the faithful, either from a second chalice at a regular liturgy where a priest is serving or in connection with a typika service that is celebrated when the priest is absent.&quot;<br />
<br />
There are two things that I wonder about in regard to the above statement. First, at seminary we were told that communing the people used to by primarily the deacons' job during the Liturgy. Which brings me to the second observation: when I was a deacon, I served in both a 'regular' liturgy and a hierarchical one where the deacon or deacons were the only ones distributing the Eucharist to the people. I'm not entirely sure how common that is or whether the above sentence should be rewritten. [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 02:37, July 5, 2008 (UTC)</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Agni_PartheneAgni Parthene2008-05-19T18:42:20Z<p>Vandrona: mostly rearranged and reworded things</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Agni Parthene''' (Gr. ''Αγνή Παρθένε'') is a non-liturgical hymn composed in Greek by St. [[Nectarios of Aegina]] in the 19th century during his tenure as director of the Rizarios Theological School of Athens. St. Nektarios liked to compose hymns in honor of the [[Theotokos|Mother of God]] to deepen his personal prayer and relationship with her. The tradition passed down at the monastery of St. Nektarios, in Aegina, Greece, is that the Lady herself appeared before him and requested that he record on paper a particular hymn the angelic choirs were about to sing. This hymn was the &quot;Agni Parthene&quot;. The original script can still be viewed on his prayer table in his bedroom at this monastery.<br />
<br />
The original melody to this hymn was composed by an Athonite hymnographer who is said to also have had a vision of the Virgin Mary prior to composing the work. The recording of this melody by the Monks of Simonopetra has contributed significantly to the popularization of the hymn.<br />
<br />
Due to its popularity, the hymn has been translated into many langauges and the original melody has been adapted to suit the particular style of church chanting. One such variation is the Valaam Monastery chant of the Russian translation.<br />
<br />
The hymn of the '''Pure Virgin''' is part of ''A Small Theotokarion'' (Athens, 1905) a book of Hymns to the Mother of God, written by St. Nektarios.<br />
<br />
This hymn has been used during communion in the Liturgy and it is sometimes chanted at the beginning of [[Vespers]].<br />
<br />
== English Translation ==<br />
'''O Virgin Pure'''<br />
:by St. Nectarios<br />
:Plagal First Tone (Tone 5)<br />
<br />
''Refrain:'' Rejoice, O Unwedded Bride!<br />
<br />
:O Virgin pure, immaculate/ O Lady Theotokos <br />
:O Virgin Mother, Queen of all/ and fleece which is all dewy <br />
:More radiant than the rays of sun/ and higher than the heavens <br />
:Delight of virgin choruses/ superior to Angels. <br />
:Much brighter than the firmament/ and purer than the sun's light <br />
:More holy than the multitude/ of all the heav'nly armies. <br />
<br />
Rejoice, O Unwedded Bride! <br />
<br />
:O Ever Virgin Mary/ of all the world, the Lady <br />
:O bride all pure, immaculate/ O Lady Panagia <br />
:O Mary bride and Queen of all/ our cause of jubilation <br />
:Majestic maiden, Queen of all/ O our most holy Mother <br />
:More hon'rable than Cherubim/ beyond compare more glorious <br />
:than immaterial Seraphim/ and greater than angelic thrones. <br />
<br />
Rejoice, O Unwedded Bride!<br />
<br />
:Rejoice, O song of Cherubim/ Rejoice, O hymn of angels <br />
:Rejoice, O ode of Seraphim/ the joy of the archangels <br />
:Rejoice, O peace and happiness/ the harbor of salvation <br />
:O sacred chamber of the Word/ flow'r of incorruption <br />
:Rejoice, delightful paradise/ of blessed life eternal <br />
:Rejoice, O wood and tree of life/ the fount of immortality.<br />
<br />
Rejoice, O Unwedded Bride!<br />
<br />
:I supplicate you, Lady/ now do I call upon you <br />
:And I beseech you, Queen of all/ I beg of you your favor <br />
:Majestic maiden, spotless one/ O Lady Panagia <br />
:I call upon you fervently/ O sacred, hallowed temple <br />
:Assist me and deliver me/ protect me from the enemy <br />
:And make me an inheritor/ of blessed life eternal. <br />
<br />
Rejoice, O Unwedded Bride!<br />
<br />
(Source and translation: Holy Nativity Convent, Saxonburg, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) <br />
http://www.serfes.org/spiritual/november1999.htm<br />
===Other translations===<br />
[http://www.nikolaresanovic.com/OPureVirgin.pdf] - the translation by [[Basil (Essey) of Wichita|Bp. Basil]]<br />
<br />
== Original Greek text ==<br />
:'''Αγνή Παρθένε'''<br />
<br />
Αγνή Παρθένε Δέσποινα, Άχραντε Θεοτόκε,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Παρθένε Μήτηρ Άνασσα, Πανένδροσε τε πόκε.<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Υψηλοτέρα Ουρανών, ακτίνων λαμπροτέρα<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Χαρά παρθενικών χορών, αγγέλων υπερτέρα,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Εκλαμπροτέρα ουρανών φωτός καθαροτέρα,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Των Ουρανίων στρατιών πασών αγιωτέρα<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Μαρία Αειπάρθενε κόσμου παντός Κυρία<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Άχραντε Νύμφη Πάναγνε Δέσποινα Παναγία,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Μαρία Νύμφη Άνασσα, χαράς ημών αιτία.<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Κορή σεμνή Βασίλισσα, Μήτηρ υπεραγία,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Τιμιώτερα Χερουβείμ υπερενδοξοτέρα<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Των ασωμάτων Σεραφείμ των Θρόνων υπερτέρα,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Χαίρε το άσμα Χερουβείμ χαίρε ύμνος Αγγέλων<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Χαίρε ωδή των Σεραφείμ Χαρά των Αρχαγγέλων<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Χαίρε ειρήνη και χαρά λιμήν της σωτηρίας<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Παστάς του Λόγου ιερά άνθος της αφθαρσίας<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Χαίρε Παράδεισε τρυφής, ζωής τε αιωνίας,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Χαίρε το ξύλον της ζωής, πηγή αθανασίας,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Σε ικετεύω Δέσποινα, Σε, νυν, επικαλούμαι,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Σε δυσωπώ Παντάνασσα, Σην χάριν εξαιτούμε.<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Κορή σεμνή και άσπιλε, Δεσποίνα Παναγία<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Θερμώς επικαλούμε Σε, Ναέ ηγιασμένε,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
Αντιλαβού μου, ρύσαι με, από τού πολεμίου,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
:Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου,<br />
:Χαίρε Νύμφη Ανύμφευτε.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
&lt;!---<br />
== Russian ==<br />
Агни Парфене (преподобный Нектарий Аэгинский)<br />
Agni Parfene (prepodobniyy Nekatriy Aeginskiy)<br />
<br />
Марие, Дево Чистая, Пресвятая Богородице,<br />
Marie, Devo Chistaya, Presvyataya Bogoroditse<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Царице Мати Дево, Руно всех покрывающее,<br />
Tsaritse Mati Devo, Runo vsekh pokriyvayushchee<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Превысшая Небесных Сил, Нетварное Сияние.<br />
Previysshaya Nebesniykh Sil, Netvarnoe Siyanie.<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Ликов девичьих Радосте, и Ангелов Превысшая,<br />
Likov devich'ikh Radoste, i Angelov Previysshaya,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Небес Честная Сило, и Свете паче все светов,<br />
Nebes Chestnaya Silo, i Svete pache vse svetov,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Честнейшая Владычице всех Небесных Воинств,<br />
Chestneyshaya Vladiychitse veskh Nebesniykh Voinstv,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Всех праотцев Надеждо, пророков Исполнение,<br />
Vsekh praottsev Nadezhdo, prorokov Ispolnenie,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
В подвизех Ты - Помоще, Кивоте Бога Слова,<br />
V podvizekh Tiy - Pomoshche, Kivote Boga Slova,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
И девам - Ликование, и матерем - Отрадо,<br />
I devam - Likovanie, i materem - Otrado,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Целомудрия Наставнице, душ наших Очищение,<br />
Tselomudpriya Nastavnitse, dush nashikh Ochishchenie,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Покрове ширший облака, и страждущих Пристанище,<br />
Pokrove shirshiy oblaka, i strazhdushchikh Pristanishche,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Немощных Покров и Заступнице, Надеждо ненадежных,<br />
Nemoshchniykh Pokrov i Zastupnitse, Nadezhdo nenadezhniykh,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Марие - Мати Христа - Истиннаго Бога,<br />
Marie - Mati Khrista - Istinnago Boga,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Ааронов Жезле Прозябший, Сосуде тихой радости,<br />
Aaronov zhezle prozyabshiy, Sosude tikhoy radosti,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Всех сирых и вдов Утешение, в бедах и скорбех - Помоще,<br />
Vsekh siriykh i vdov Uteshenie, v belakh i skorbekh - Pomoshche,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Священная и Непорочная, Владычице Всепетая,<br />
Svyashchennaya i Neporochnaya, Vladiychitse Vsepetaya,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Приклони ко мне милосердие Божественнаго Сына,<br />
Prikloni ko mne miloserdie Bozhestvennago Siyna,<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
Ходайце спасения, припадая взываю Ти:<br />
Khodaitse spaseniya, pripadaya vziyvayu Ti:<br />
Радуйся Невесто Неневестная.<br />
Raduysya Nevesto Nenevestnaya.<br />
---&gt;<br />
<br />
==Sources==<br />
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni_Parthene Wikipedia: Agni Parthene]<br />
*[http://www.matia.gr/7/72/7201/7201_1_9.html Αγνή Παρθένε, the Greek text]<br />
*[http://www.orthodox.net/services/o-pure-virgin.html English translation (with metrical notes)]<br />
<br />
== External links ==<br />
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IomxvOTf-So Agni Parthene (Complete) on YouTube]<br />
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQs0MUuJKKI Agni Parthene--Divna Ljubojevic on YouTube]<br />
*Other YouTube versions: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Quj_ChDa1ZY 1], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1bmJcY_59U 2 (Romanian - Fecioara curata)], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SeWvnnzZso 3], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC6cYKQ4-tQ 4 (Slavonic)], [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptg3RVtoeYA 5 (St. Nektarios)], [http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22Agni+Partene%22+OR+%22Agni+Parthene%22&amp;search_type= 6 (more)]<br />
*[http://www.imr.gr/multimedia/Agni_parthene_simonopetra.mp3 Free sample performed by the Monks of Simonopetra Monastery]<br />
*[http://www.musicarussica.com/multimedia/clips/e15_trk23.mp3 Free sample of Russian performance]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Liturgics]]<br />
[[Category:Church Music]]<br />
[[Category:Hymnography]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:Vandrona/sigUser:Vandrona/sig2008-05-03T12:57:29Z<p>Vandrona: wifely insistence</p>
<hr />
<div>—[[User:Vandrona|Fr. Peter]] ([[User_talk:Vandrona|talk]])</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Talk:John_(Zizioulas)_of_PergamonTalk:John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon2008-05-03T12:55:18Z<p>Vandrona: /* Just a thought */</p>
<hr />
<div>*[[Talk:John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon/Archive 1|Archive 1]] - from Creation to Protection (Mar 6).<br />
*[[Talk:John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon/Archive 2|Archive 2]] - from Protection to Unprotection (Apr 30).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Reversion ==<br />
<br />
I've rolled back [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]]'s recent major changes (essentially for reasons detailed throughout this Talk page)&amp;mdash;perhaps it was a mistake to unprotect the article again so soon. I'll leave it unprotected for now, hoping that Agenda-driven edits won't take over again. If they do, and especially if they're from [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]], it may be necessary to introduce a ban on that editor for a time. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:07, April 30, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Your revert without even reading the changes I put in is another proof that this website has no interest in expressing the reality that exists in The Church, but rather fictitious visions of several individuals claiming to be &quot;fr&quot;. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 18:30, April 30, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: Oh, trust me&amp;mdash;I read them. Anyway, [[w:Talk:John Zizioulas]], along with your Agenda here, demonstrate that you're not interested in pursuing the editing of an encyclopedia in a calm manner. Indeed, your above condemnation of our many thousands of editors ''en masse'' is a pretty clear indication that you're not interested in good faith editing. As noted on your Talk page, your account has been banned. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:33, April 30, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: Your action against my account was illegal. It represented misjudgment on your side, which resulted in misuse of your sysops powers. Consequently, your error was reverted by Fr. John. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 18:21, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: Illegal? Are you planning to sue me now? (In what court?) &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:25, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Enough ==<br />
<br />
This is an Orthodox Website which for many people is a valuable source of knowledge. The attacks against His Eminence Metropolitan John of Pergamon, or any other hierarch of the Holy Orthodox Church, are not necessary on this forum. Whilst I don't share the same ecclesiological opinions as His Eminence, I have no right as a member of the Church to criticise him. Please, for the sake of those young people who use this website for edification, cease these attacks on the hierachy of the One, Holy Orthodox Church. - Peter Mav<br />
<br />
:I also agree Peter, it would be a good idea if the discussion around this Father of the church is put on hold and indeed perhaps we should pray for the poor dear's soul as the amount of negativity emitted towards him is very unfair! I say, lets all work towards continuing to build Orthodox articles not critical defences to be used in a court of law. I dont even know why he is controversial :-) Like Mother Molania said in her talk from [[Ancient Faith Radio]], Insane people associating with insane people can not become sane ...only the Saints are &quot;sane&quot;! Chit chatting, keeps US in INSANITY! [[User:Ixthis888|Vasiliki]] 09:32, May 1, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: That is precisely why all over the article of Metropolitan John and other contemporary Orthodox theologians we should print in big bold letters: “DO NOT BASE YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE ORTHODOXY ON WIRITINGS OF THIS CONTEMPORARIES WHOSE THEOLOGY IS NOT VERIFIED BY THE HISTORY YET. USE THEOLOGY OF THE HOLY FATHERS INSTEAD.” <br />
<br />
:: We do not want to educate young people with the thought of the potentially problematic theologians like m. John (and fr. Schmmemmann, fr. Mayendorff, fr. Afanasiev, etc. – students of the “Paris school of Orthodoxy”). If you want to discuss it further, and you know more appropriate place (e.g. private forum), we can go there and continue. <br />
<br />
:: [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 14:59, May 1, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: This is an encyclopedia, not a catechism. We're not in the business of putting big warning labels on articles about modern writers, especially those who are generally quite well-regarded throughout the Orthodox world, such as nearly everyone you mention.<br />
<br />
::: That they are criticized by certain minority sectors of Orthodoxy is certainly a viable element for their respective articles, but that criticism should not be the dominant theme of the article, which would be undue weight. The impression a reader should get ought to be based on how the writer is regarded throughout the Orthodox Church, not on the idiosyncratic criticisms of a few, especially not regarding someone who's never even been accused by the proper authorities (much less condemned by them).<br />
<br />
::: In any event, any general overview of Orthodoxy makes it plain that our theological emphasis is on the Scriptures and the Holy Fathers, not on any modern writer. If someone gets his entire impression of Orthodoxy or education in the faith from a single article on OrthodoxWiki, well, he's going about it wrong. One would hope that common sense would make that clear. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:31, May 1, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with some points raised by all who have responded. I am still concerned however, because I know a lot of youths use this website for introductory information and not having extensive knowledge or sometimes even the spiritual grounding can be scandalised. Obviously, mentioning that this hierarch's teachings are not accepted by some is good, encyclopaedic knowledge but some of the criticisms prior to their removal were not beneficial to the soul of anyone. I apologise if I have offended anyone. - Peter Mav<br />
<br />
: In the above response of user Andrew we find the basis for the entire dispute. He is saying that Metropolitan John is ''&quot;regarded throughout the Orthodox Church&quot;'' and being ''&quot;criticized by certain minority sectors of Orthodoxy&quot;'', which is completely untrue/false/wrong/misguiding/misleading/etc. Vast majority of Orthodoxy exists beyond US shoreline, and even beyond English speaking world. Sooner that group of the individuals realize that, sooner we will get synergy in our actions. Such a fringe and perverted view of position of m. John in Orthodoxy is what user Andrew and couple of other individuals kept promoting, constantly trying to minimize the number and extent of the critics. It is best evident in the current version of the article, when in the criticism section they put reference to Bishop Ignjatije, who praises his work. What is that reference doing there? [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 12:54, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think that the user Fr Andrew is correct in his assessment. Lest anyone get the impression that the Serbian Church has somehow made a judgement that Metropolitan John is heterodox, I thought it worthwhile to note that a bishop and professor of theology in Serbia is a strong supporter of Metropolitan John's work. Anytime anyone disagrees with Cebactokpatop, he resorts to personal attack (both here and in the Wikipedia article). He has attacked and dismissed not only the other editors and Metropolitan John, but also:<br />
*Bishop Kallistos Ware (&quot;Ecumenist buddy of JZ&quot;) <br />
*Christos Yannaras (&quot;Ecumenist buddy of JZ&quot;)<br />
*Fr John Meyendorff (&quot;Heterodox&quot;, along with Schmmemann and Afanasiev)<br />
*Fr Boris Bobrinskoy (&quot;never heard of this guy&quot;): I can't help it if Cebactokpatop hasn't heard of the dean of the St Sergius Institute in Paris, but then again, he dismisses the Paris school as &quot;heterodox.&quot;<br />
*Bishop Ignjatije Midić (&quot;ecumenist... who can hardly be called a theologian, as he is almost not writing anything&quot;): Well, in addition to being bishop of Branicevo, he is professor of dogmatics and ethics at the Serbian theological institute in Belgrade and is the author of a new book on dogmatics. <br />
*Aristotle Papanikolaou (&quot;Another buddy of JZ&quot;), etc. <br />
<br />
When I mentioned Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos, his only response was &quot;Are you sure?&quot; The answer to that is, Yes. If one checks the several references to Metropolitan John in Metropolitan Hierotheos' book on the person, one finds they are all very positive. On a personal note, having just finished reading ''Communion and Otherness'' and looking through ''Being as Communion'' again, I do not see how anyone who carefully read them could give any credence to the charges Cebactokpatop has made, not least of which is the absurd charge of heterodoxy. Aprt from the Serbian text he cites by Lazic and the interview with Archbishop Stylianos, NONE of the sources he cites as criticisms draw his conclusions. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 13:51, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: You are certainly entitled to support JZ and other individuals from Paris school of &quot;orthodoxy&quot;. However, you are not entitled to personally dismiss me for providing valid academic resources that criticize JZ or any other product of mentioned school in Paris. From the list of the articles you contributed to, we can clearly see that your faith is in Paris. Orthodox who prefer to have their faith elswhere (e.g. Cappadocia), have a right to express their dissatisfaction with the innovations of Paris' school as well. You have done a great job in prizing JZ's work in the article. Now it is a time to balance it with the concerns of the Traditional Orthodox, Mr. Puhalo. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 17:43, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: Methinks you have Fr. Lev confused with Abp. [[Lazar (Puhalo) of Ottawa]]. They're not the same person. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:02, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: Are you sure about that my friend? I am beyond reasonable doubts... they are the same person. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 18:10, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::: Based on what? The name &quot;Lev&quot;? &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:31, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
ROTFL! I have been accused of many things in my life, but never of being an archbishop! --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 19:12, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: You are right. You are not an Archbishop. To become the one, it would require valid canonical ordination. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 19:14, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Another personal attack -- ''quelle surprise''! I was &quot;canonically&quot; ordained, BTW, by a &quot;canonical&quot; bishop of a &quot;canonical&quot; patriarchal Church. I know who I am, but I have no idea who Cebactokpatop is. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 19:30, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Whatever. I am not interested in &quot;canonicity&quot; of your ordination (if any). What I am interested in, is making sure you understand that current version of the article is not balanced, as you intentionally (or not) tried to minimize criticisms of JZ. Do you understand that? If you do, it would be easier for me to go in and try to balance it so that readers do not get an impression that they have before them, article about some &quot;saint&quot;. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 20:12, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Ok, enough everyone with the personal back and forth. I agree that the article should also present criticisms fairly and rationally. Cebactokpatop, I am concerned by your personal attacks, which at least in some cases are totally unfounded, and to my mind, crazy (e.g. Fr Lev is not Archbp Lazar!). If this kind of stuff continues, I'm going to freeze this page. I've just edited the article to incorporate some of the material present in earlier drafts. — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk]) 21:17, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Material for Inclusion ==<br />
<br />
* [[Fr. John Behr]] in the aticle ''&quot;The Trinitarian Being of the Church&quot;'', argues that Zizioulas' use of The Three as an archetype for The Church, when he establishes communion of The Church as an image of the communion od The Three, ends up dismissing both - The Three and The Church. ''(St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 48:1 (2004), 67-88)'' {{unsigned|Cebactokpatop}}<br />
<br />
In reviewing Fr John Behr's essay, I don't see it saying anything to suggest that Metropolitan John's view ends us &quot;dismissing&quot; the Trinity and the Church. I'd like to see the quote and page number that is alleged to say that. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 22:54, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Any suggestions on how to reword Fr. Behr's criticism? Isn't this dismissal of The Church: ''&quot;What is said of the Church is certainly based upon what is said of the Trinity, but the effect of speaking in this manner, paradoxically, is that the Church is separated from God, as a distinct entity reflecting the divine being.&quot;'' (page 68) Church without ties to God does not exist, even though, it may perfectly mimic the Three. At the same time, we do not know The Three without Their Church. It is The Church that is left behind to proclaim The Three. Disconnect JZ creates, dismisses The Church, and conequenly blind us from The Three, which equates to dismissal. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:43, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== What counts as &quot;academic criticism&quot;? ==<br />
<br />
Fr John, I find your floowing edit problematic: &quot;Peter J. Leithart's article, Divine Energies and Orthodox Soteriology, cites the work of Papanikolaou, and points out where Vladimir Lossky and Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) differ on the issue of divine energies. His article implies criticism, based on understanding of the certain Orthodox, who see work of Prof. Lossky as contemporary synthesis of the patristic theology. Thus, to differ from Prof. Lossky, is to differ from patristic theology.&quot;<br />
<br />
(1) Leithart in no way understands hie article to be critical of Metropolitan John. Not only is that clear from actually reading the article, but he has confirmed that in personal correspondence. (2) There is nothing here to indicate there is any substantive problem with what Metropolitan John says about the essence/energies distinction. (3) If an undergraduate wrote in an academic paper the sentence, &quot;Thus, to differ from Prof. Lossky, is to differ from patristic theology&quot;, there wouldn't get a very good grade. Lossky is a personal theological hereo of mine, but I don't know any serious theologian who would judge him to be the sole criterion of Orthodoxy. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 23:13, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Indeed, no. Lossky himself has been criticized by major figures in the 20th century, e.g., Staniloae, who's no theological slouch himself. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 02:42, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: Zizioulas and Meyendorff fell into the pit trying to criticise either Lossky or St. Gregory Palamas, as both of them are not capable of grasping what those two champions were writing about. Area related to the Holy Spirit is unknown and incomprehensible to these &quot;eucharistic ecclesiologians&quot; who understand bodily portion only, based on instructions from RCC theologians Mr. Congar and Mr. Lubac. In order to understand The Spirit, one has to now The Spirit of Orthodoxy. Paris school is so far from that Spirit that their theology consequently, can not be in the Spirit of Orthodoxy. In order to &quot;bring closer&quot; Orthodoxy to Rome (ecumenists), they have to introduce some other spirit - that is spirit of Rome. Orthodox Spirit can never get any closer to Rome than in past 1000 years. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 02:59, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: An interesting analysis, but I fail to see how this is relevant to the task at hand, which is summarizing reliable secondary sources into an encyclopedia entry which represents the mainstream Chalcedonian viewpoint and takes minor note of other relevant viewpoints. Personal attacks are not really germane&amp;mdash;how do you know what Meyendorff or Metr. John are &quot;capable of grasping&quot;? &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 03:08, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: That was my response on your assertion: &quot;Lossky himself has been criticized&quot; with my addition of Meyendorff and St. Gregory as another example of the same failure. JZ in his bible Being as Commununion &quot;showed&quot; how Lossky &quot;was wrong&quot;. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:15, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Should criticism be 'mainstream'? ==<br />
<br />
I have read repeatedly that OrthoWiki is about &quot;mainstream&quot; Orthodoxy. Some of the criticism included here is, e.g., from Old Calendarists, who condemn most of the Churches represented here for using the Revised Julian calendar or for ecumenism. Nothing against Old Calendarist &quot;resistance&quot; synods and hyper-traditionalists, but what relevance should their criticism have in a minstream venue such as this? Given that they make the same criticisms of Bishop Kallistos, Fr Alexander Schmemann, Fr John Meyendorff, Christos Yannaras, etc., as they do of Metropolitan John, why should this be included? And all to satisfy one editor whose personal animus is clear? What will come next? When he became convinced &quot;beyond reasonable doubts&quot; that I am Abp Lazar Puhalo, he immediately went to the page on the Archbishop to write negative comments. I am waiting for him to add &quot;criticism&quot; sections to the articles on Bishop Kallistos, Fr Alexander Schmemann, et al., in which they, too, are denounced as heterodox ecumenists of the Paris School. What is to stop him? After all, he can find a blog or an online article by or quoting Heiromonk Patapios or Archbishop Chrysostomos casting aspersions on the orthodoxy of them all. He has dismissed Bishop Ignatije (Midic) of Pozarevac and Branicevo. Look what passes for &quot;criticism&quot; in the link he provided on that page -- a blog entry with a paragraph of Bishop Ignatije. No argument. Even the priest who wrote the blog wasn't sure that the paragraph was a true representation of Bishop Ignatije. This is the &quot;criticism&quot; that should be included in an encyclopedia article? --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 00:59, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: I think your point is well made. The so-called &quot;Traditionalist Orthodox&quot; are explicitly not given a soapbox here, as per the [[OW:NPOV|MCB]]. If there seems to be a united front against the subject of an article from those sectors, it is enough to mention it briefly, but not to allow it to dominate an article.<br />
<br />
: In any event, what is clear is that Metr. John is generally quite highly regarded throughout the Orthodox Church, which is explicitly defined on OrthodoxWiki as [[List of autocephalous and autonomous churches|this list]], i.e., the Mainstream Chalcedonian churches. Metr. John is not a controversial figure by any means, and the article should reflect that. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 02:37, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: I dod not provide any link to Bishop Ignjatije. Please stop telling false stories. Also, &quot;resistance&quot; Orthodox are in dogmatics same as Orthodox, which makes them valid in their criticisms. What they differ about is heresy over all heresies - ecumenism, and masonic infux into Orthodoxy - [[Meletios IV (Metaxakis) of Constantinople]]. It appears that those who praise Paris school of &quot;orthodoxy&quot; support ecumenism, and logically, regard &quot;reistance&quot; Orthodox as lesser Orthodox than Vatican! [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 02:47, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: If I am mistaken in how I read the OrthoWiki history page on the article, my apology. But it seems to say you created that link at 21:53 on May 2, 2008: http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=Ignatije_%28Midic%29_of_Pozarevac_and_Branicevo&amp;diff=65572&amp;oldid=42851<br />
--[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 02:54, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]], all of this is essentially irrelevant. The do-it-yourself &quot;Celtic Orthodox&quot; gent who lives near here and visits our church every so often is also quite likely &quot;in dogmatics same as Orthodox,&quot; but I'm not about to interview him for this article.<br />
<br />
:: The point is that what the &quot;resistance/True/Genuine/Traditionalist/etc.&quot; groups think is only of relatively small importance on most OrthodoxWiki articles. Whatever one may think of the so-called &quot;Paris School&quot; (whatever that may mean&amp;mdash;does that simply mean St. Sergius Institute?), it currently is part of and accepted by mainstream Orthodoxy, while by comparison the &quot;resistance/True/Genuine/Traditionalist/etc.&quot; groups are fringe. Their opinions on Metr. John are irrelevant. Perhaps if one of them had engaged in some major debate with him, they might be relevant.<br />
<br />
:: One doesn't have to be an &quot;ecumenist&quot; or a Freemason or an Ultramontanist sympathizer in order to see that giving undue weight to the opinions of such folks is essentially a violation of the explicit bias of OrthodoxWiki. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 02:57, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: I repeat - I did not produce any link related to Bishop Ignjatije. All I did on his page was to convert section listing his writings from latin into cyrillic. <br />
<br />
::: It appears to me that both of you want to minimize amount and extent of the criticisms for some reason. Can you provide a valid reason for your attempts to blind the public? [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:08, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: It's not a question of eliminating criticism (OrthodoxWiki articles are replete with descriptions of criticism, which is clear from even a cursory browsing of the site)&amp;mdash;it's where it's coming from and how much is actually appropriate to represent the mainstream view on the subject matter. Piling an article high with criticisms from fringe sources is not consistent with the policies of OrthodoxWiki, nor does it do anyone a service. &quot;The public&quot; are not &quot;blinded&quot; by an attempt to write balanced articles consistent with OrthodoxWiki policies. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 03:11, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::: I have a problem with your statements simply because all of the disputes I had here were about same thing - constant denial of the criticisms from several individuals who disguise their denial under the mask of &quot;policies&quot;, &quot;encyclopedia&quot;, &quot;POV/NPOV&quot;, etc. What is balanced for you? To praise his work on two pages, and then mention critics in a mild form just to satisfy annoyances like myself? [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:20, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Just a thought ==<br />
<br />
It seems to me that this article is basically supposed to be a biographical introduction to Metr. John. While mention of the variety of opinions expressed about his work can, and probably should, be mentioned, it seems to me that this is not the proper forum for a detailed discussion (and listing) of these opinions. Half of the article, as it stands, is concerned with criticism and responses to that criticism and that seems rather unbalanced for something that is trying to be an encyclopedic entry. <br />
<br />
I am not sure where a discussion of all these opinions should take place, or even whether OrthodoxWiki is the right forum for such a discussion. It just seems to me that this particular page is not the place for it.<br />
<br />
Just my two cents, and with this I leave this debate.<br />
<br />
In the risen Christ,<br />
[[User:Vandrona|Fr. Peter]]<br />
<br />
:Hi Fr. Peter, Thanks for your comments on this. It is indeed a hard call, but I do think that part of the role OrthodoxWiki plays is precisely in pushing for an articulation of controversial issues in church life. Obviously, so many of the criticisms of Metropolitan John's work are not just about him, but are about a particular movement or trend within Orthodox theology. I really want to see as precise and accurate overview of this debate as possible. Again, I do think this itself is a good service to the community. I'm not interested in personal attacks or blanket condemnations, etc. but am very interested in thoughtful criticisms or defenses. I'm curious about what others think. — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk]) 09:27, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Hello, Fr. John. I apologize for the lack of clarity in my original post, so I will try to briefly clarify what I was trying to say. First off, having thought about it and read your reply, it does make sense that the wiki is a good place to articulate controversial issues. In which case I meant to suggest following a Wikipedia approach: having a mention of the controversial issue on the biographical page with a link to an article specifically dedicated to the issue being debated (e.g., &quot;Theology of John Zizioulas&quot;). That way we can avoid the contentious section being longer than the rest of the article. We also get another page where all the relevant references can be quoted and noted (hopefully...), rather than simply having somewhat vague mentions in the vein of &quot;Metr. John has addressed this criticism.&quot; [[User:Vandrona|Fr. Peter]]<br />
<br />
I notice a minor edit &quot;struggle&quot; over the sentence someone wrote and I restored: &quot;His article implies criticism, based on understanding of the certain Orthodox, who see work of [[Vladimir Lossky|Prof. Lossky]] as contemporary synthesis of the patristic theology. Thus, to differ from [[Vladimir Lossky|Prof. Lossky]], is to differ from patristic theology.&quot; This had been changed to &quot;This article would be critical if seen through the ideology of [[Vladimir Lossky|Prof. Lossky]]'s work as being a contemporary synthesis of patristic theology.&quot; I think I understand the reason for this change -- the original sentence is rather vague and difficult to make sense of (it may be that the original author's primary language was not English), but I'm not sure the cleanup help makes the meaning any clearer. Perhaps somehow can expain this better, but for now I going to revert this again. — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk]) 09:27, May 3, 2008 (UTC)</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Talk:John_(Zizioulas)_of_PergamonTalk:John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon2008-05-03T03:44:31Z<p>Vandrona: /* Just a thought */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>*[[Talk:John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon/Archive 1|Archive 1]] - from Creation to Protection (Mar 6).<br />
*[[Talk:John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon/Archive 2|Archive 2]] - from Protection to Unprotection (Apr 30).<br />
<br />
<br />
== Reversion ==<br />
<br />
I've rolled back [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]]'s recent major changes (essentially for reasons detailed throughout this Talk page)&amp;mdash;perhaps it was a mistake to unprotect the article again so soon. I'll leave it unprotected for now, hoping that Agenda-driven edits won't take over again. If they do, and especially if they're from [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]], it may be necessary to introduce a ban on that editor for a time. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:07, April 30, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Your revert without even reading the changes I put in is another proof that this website has no interest in expressing the reality that exists in The Church, but rather fictitious visions of several individuals claiming to be &quot;fr&quot;. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 18:30, April 30, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: Oh, trust me&amp;mdash;I read them. Anyway, [[w:Talk:John Zizioulas]], along with your Agenda here, demonstrate that you're not interested in pursuing the editing of an encyclopedia in a calm manner. Indeed, your above condemnation of our many thousands of editors ''en masse'' is a pretty clear indication that you're not interested in good faith editing. As noted on your Talk page, your account has been banned. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:33, April 30, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: Your action against my account was illegal. It represented misjudgment on your side, which resulted in misuse of your sysops powers. Consequently, your error was reverted by Fr. John. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 18:21, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: Illegal? Are you planning to sue me now? (In what court?) &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:25, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Enough ==<br />
<br />
This is an Orthodox Website which for many people is a valuable source of knowledge. The attacks against His Eminence Metropolitan John of Pergamon, or any other hierarch of the Holy Orthodox Church, are not necessary on this forum. Whilst I don't share the same ecclesiological opinions as His Eminence, I have no right as a member of the Church to criticise him. Please, for the sake of those young people who use this website for edification, cease these attacks on the hierachy of the One, Holy Orthodox Church. - Peter Mav<br />
<br />
:I also agree Peter, it would be a good idea if the discussion around this Father of the church is put on hold and indeed perhaps we should pray for the poor dear's soul as the amount of negativity emitted towards him is very unfair! I say, lets all work towards continuing to build Orthodox articles not critical defences to be used in a court of law. I dont even know why he is controversial :-) Like Mother Molania said in her talk from [[Ancient Faith Radio]], Insane people associating with insane people can not become sane ...only the Saints are &quot;sane&quot;! Chit chatting, keeps US in INSANITY! [[User:Ixthis888|Vasiliki]] 09:32, May 1, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: That is precisely why all over the article of Metropolitan John and other contemporary Orthodox theologians we should print in big bold letters: “DO NOT BASE YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE ORTHODOXY ON WIRITINGS OF THIS CONTEMPORARIES WHOSE THEOLOGY IS NOT VERIFIED BY THE HISTORY YET. USE THEOLOGY OF THE HOLY FATHERS INSTEAD.” <br />
<br />
:: We do not want to educate young people with the thought of the potentially problematic theologians like m. John (and fr. Schmmemmann, fr. Mayendorff, fr. Afanasiev, etc. – students of the “Paris school of Orthodoxy”). If you want to discuss it further, and you know more appropriate place (e.g. private forum), we can go there and continue. <br />
<br />
:: [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 14:59, May 1, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: This is an encyclopedia, not a catechism. We're not in the business of putting big warning labels on articles about modern writers, especially those who are generally quite well-regarded throughout the Orthodox world, such as nearly everyone you mention.<br />
<br />
::: That they are criticized by certain minority sectors of Orthodoxy is certainly a viable element for their respective articles, but that criticism should not be the dominant theme of the article, which would be undue weight. The impression a reader should get ought to be based on how the writer is regarded throughout the Orthodox Church, not on the idiosyncratic criticisms of a few, especially not regarding someone who's never even been accused by the proper authorities (much less condemned by them).<br />
<br />
::: In any event, any general overview of Orthodoxy makes it plain that our theological emphasis is on the Scriptures and the Holy Fathers, not on any modern writer. If someone gets his entire impression of Orthodoxy or education in the faith from a single article on OrthodoxWiki, well, he's going about it wrong. One would hope that common sense would make that clear. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:31, May 1, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree with some points raised by all who have responded. I am still concerned however, because I know a lot of youths use this website for introductory information and not having extensive knowledge or sometimes even the spiritual grounding can be scandalised. Obviously, mentioning that this hierarch's teachings are not accepted by some is good, encyclopaedic knowledge but some of the criticisms prior to their removal were not beneficial to the soul of anyone. I apologise if I have offended anyone. - Peter Mav<br />
<br />
: In the above response of user Andrew we find the basis for the entire dispute. He is saying that Metropolitan John is ''&quot;regarded throughout the Orthodox Church&quot;'' and being ''&quot;criticized by certain minority sectors of Orthodoxy&quot;'', which is completely untrue/false/wrong/misguiding/misleading/etc. Vast majority of Orthodoxy exists beyond US shoreline, and even beyond English speaking world. Sooner that group of the individuals realize that, sooner we will get synergy in our actions. Such a fringe and perverted view of position of m. John in Orthodoxy is what user Andrew and couple of other individuals kept promoting, constantly trying to minimize the number and extent of the critics. It is best evident in the current version of the article, when in the criticism section they put reference to Bishop Ignjatije, who praises his work. What is that reference doing there? [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 12:54, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I think that the user Fr Andrew is correct in his assessment. Lest anyone get the impression that the Serbian Church has somehow made a judgement that Metropolitan John is heterodox, I thought it worthwhile to note that a bishop and professor of theology in Serbia is a strong supporter of Metropolitan John's work. Anytime anyone disagrees with Cebactokpatop, he resorts to personal attack (both here and in the Wikipedia article). He has attacked and dismissed not only the other editors and Metropolitan John, but also:<br />
*Bishop Kallistos Ware (&quot;Ecumenist buddy of JZ&quot;) <br />
*Christos Yannaras (&quot;Ecumenist buddy of JZ&quot;)<br />
*Fr John Meyendorff (&quot;Heterodox&quot;, along with Schmmemann and Afanasiev)<br />
*Fr Boris Bobrinskoy (&quot;never heard of this guy&quot;): I can't help it if Cebactokpatop hasn't heard of the dean of the St Sergius Institute in Paris, but then again, he dismisses the Paris school as &quot;heterodox.&quot;<br />
*Bishop Ignjatije Midić (&quot;ecumenist... who can hardly be called a theologian, as he is almost not writing anything&quot;): Well, in addition to being bishop of Branicevo, he is professor of dogmatics and ethics at the Serbian theological institute in Belgrade and is the author of a new book on dogmatics. <br />
*Aristotle Papanikolaou (&quot;Another buddy of JZ&quot;), etc. <br />
<br />
When I mentioned Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos, his only response was &quot;Are you sure?&quot; The answer to that is, Yes. If one checks the several references to Metropolitan John in Metropolitan Hierotheos' book on the person, one finds they are all very positive. On a personal note, having just finished reading ''Communion and Otherness'' and looking through ''Being as Communion'' again, I do not see how anyone who carefully read them could give any credence to the charges Cebactokpatop has made, not least of which is the absurd charge of heterodoxy. Aprt from the Serbian text he cites by Lazic and the interview with Archbishop Stylianos, NONE of the sources he cites as criticisms draw his conclusions. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 13:51, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: You are certainly entitled to support JZ and other individuals from Paris school of &quot;orthodoxy&quot;. However, you are not entitled to personally dismiss me for providing valid academic resources that criticize JZ or any other product of mentioned school in Paris. From the list of the articles you contributed to, we can clearly see that your faith is in Paris. Orthodox who prefer to have their faith elswhere (e.g. Cappadocia), have a right to express their dissatisfaction with the innovations of Paris' school as well. You have done a great job in prizing JZ's work in the article. Now it is a time to balance it with the concerns of the Traditional Orthodox, Mr. Puhalo. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 17:43, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: Methinks you have Fr. Lev confused with Abp. [[Lazar (Puhalo) of Ottawa]]. They're not the same person. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:02, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: Are you sure about that my friend? I am beyond reasonable doubts... they are the same person. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 18:10, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::: Based on what? The name &quot;Lev&quot;? &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 18:31, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
ROTFL! I have been accused of many things in my life, but never of being an archbishop! --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 19:12, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: You are right. You are not an Archbishop. To become the one, it would require valid canonical ordination. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 19:14, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Another personal attack -- ''quelle surprise''! I was &quot;canonically&quot; ordained, BTW, by a &quot;canonical&quot; bishop of a &quot;canonical&quot; patriarchal Church. I know who I am, but I have no idea who Cebactokpatop is. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 19:30, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Whatever. I am not interested in &quot;canonicity&quot; of your ordination (if any). What I am interested in, is making sure you understand that current version of the article is not balanced, as you intentionally (or not) tried to minimize criticisms of JZ. Do you understand that? If you do, it would be easier for me to go in and try to balance it so that readers do not get an impression that they have before them, article about some &quot;saint&quot;. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 20:12, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Ok, enough everyone with the personal back and forth. I agree that the article should also present criticisms fairly and rationally. Cebactokpatop, I am concerned by your personal attacks, which at least in some cases are totally unfounded, and to my mind, crazy (e.g. Fr Lev is not Archbp Lazar!). If this kind of stuff continues, I'm going to freeze this page. I've just edited the article to incorporate some of the material present in earlier drafts. — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk]) 21:17, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Material for Inclusion ==<br />
<br />
* [[Fr. John Behr]] in the aticle ''&quot;The Trinitarian Being of the Church&quot;'', argues that Zizioulas' use of The Three as an archetype for The Church, when he establishes communion of The Church as an image of the communion od The Three, ends up dismissing both - The Three and The Church. ''(St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 48:1 (2004), 67-88)'' {{unsigned|Cebactokpatop}}<br />
<br />
In reviewing Fr John Behr's essay, I don't see it saying anything to suggest that Metropolitan John's view ends us &quot;dismissing&quot; the Trinity and the Church. I'd like to see the quote and page number that is alleged to say that. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 22:54, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Any suggestions on how to reword Fr. Behr's criticism? Isn't this dismissal of The Church: ''&quot;What is said of the Church is certainly based upon what is said of the Trinity, but the effect of speaking in this manner, paradoxically, is that the Church is separated from God, as a distinct entity reflecting the divine being.&quot;'' (page 68) Church without ties to God does not exist, even though, it may perfectly mimic the Three. At the same time, we do not know The Three without Their Church. It is The Church that is left behind to proclaim The Three. Disconnect JZ creates, dismisses The Church, and conequenly blind us from The Three, which equates to dismissal. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:43, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== What counts as &quot;academic criticism&quot;? ==<br />
<br />
Fr John, I find your floowing edit problematic: &quot;Peter J. Leithart's article, Divine Energies and Orthodox Soteriology, cites the work of Papanikolaou, and points out where Vladimir Lossky and Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) differ on the issue of divine energies. His article implies criticism, based on understanding of the certain Orthodox, who see work of Prof. Lossky as contemporary synthesis of the patristic theology. Thus, to differ from Prof. Lossky, is to differ from patristic theology.&quot;<br />
<br />
(1) Leithart in no way understands hie article to be critical of Metropolitan John. Not only is that clear from actually reading the article, but he has confirmed that in personal correspondence. (2) There is nothing here to indicate there is any substantive problem with what Metropolitan John says about the essence/energies distinction. (3) If an undergraduate wrote in an academic paper the sentence, &quot;Thus, to differ from Prof. Lossky, is to differ from patristic theology&quot;, there wouldn't get a very good grade. Lossky is a personal theological hereo of mine, but I don't know any serious theologian who would judge him to be the sole criterion of Orthodoxy. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 23:13, May 2, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Indeed, no. Lossky himself has been criticized by major figures in the 20th century, e.g., Staniloae, who's no theological slouch himself. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 02:42, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: Zizioulas and Meyendorff fell into the pit trying to criticise either Lossky or St. Gregory Palamas, as both of them are not capable of grasping what those two champions were writing about. Area related to the Holy Spirit is unknown and incomprehensible to these &quot;eucharistic ecclesiologians&quot; who understand bodily portion only, based on instructions from RCC theologians Mr. Congar and Mr. Lubac. In order to understand The Spirit, one has to now The Spirit of Orthodoxy. Paris school is so far from that Spirit that their theology consequently, can not be in the Spirit of Orthodoxy. In order to &quot;bring closer&quot; Orthodoxy to Rome (ecumenists), they have to introduce some other spirit - that is spirit of Rome. Orthodox Spirit can never get any closer to Rome than in past 1000 years. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 02:59, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: An interesting analysis, but I fail to see how this is relevant to the task at hand, which is summarizing reliable secondary sources into an encyclopedia entry which represents the mainstream Chalcedonian viewpoint and takes minor note of other relevant viewpoints. Personal attacks are not really germane&amp;mdash;how do you know what Meyendorff or Metr. John are &quot;capable of grasping&quot;? &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 03:08, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: That was my response on your assertion: &quot;Lossky himself has been criticized&quot; with my addition of Meyendorff and St. Gregory as another example of the same failure. JZ in his bible Being as Commununion &quot;showed&quot; how Lossky &quot;was wrong&quot;. [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:15, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Should criticism be 'mainstream'? ==<br />
<br />
I have read repeatedly that OrthoWiki is about &quot;mainstream&quot; Orthodoxy. Some of the criticism included here is, e.g., from Old Calendarists, who condemn most of the Churches represented here for using the Revised Julian calendar or for ecumenism. Nothing against Old Calendarist &quot;resistance&quot; synods and hyper-traditionalists, but what relevance should their criticism have in a minstream venue such as this? Given that they make the same criticisms of Bishop Kallistos, Fr Alexander Schmemann, Fr John Meyendorff, Christos Yannaras, etc., as they do of Metropolitan John, why should this be included? And all to satisfy one editor whose personal animus is clear? What will come next? When he became convinced &quot;beyond reasonable doubts&quot; that I am Abp Lazar Puhalo, he immediately went to the page on the Archbishop to write negative comments. I am waiting for him to add &quot;criticism&quot; sections to the articles on Bishop Kallistos, Fr Alexander Schmemann, et al., in which they, too, are denounced as heterodox ecumenists of the Paris School. What is to stop him? After all, he can find a blog or an online article by or quoting Heiromonk Patapios or Archbishop Chrysostomos casting aspersions on the orthodoxy of them all. He has dismissed Bishop Ignatije (Midic) of Pozarevac and Branicevo. Look what passes for &quot;criticism&quot; in the link he provided on that page -- a blog entry with a paragraph of Bishop Ignatije. No argument. Even the priest who wrote the blog wasn't sure that the paragraph was a true representation of Bishop Ignatije. This is the &quot;criticism&quot; that should be included in an encyclopedia article? --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 00:59, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: I think your point is well made. The so-called &quot;Traditionalist Orthodox&quot; are explicitly not given a soapbox here, as per the [[OW:NPOV|MCB]]. If there seems to be a united front against the subject of an article from those sectors, it is enough to mention it briefly, but not to allow it to dominate an article.<br />
<br />
: In any event, what is clear is that Metr. John is generally quite highly regarded throughout the Orthodox Church, which is explicitly defined on OrthodoxWiki as [[List of autocephalous and autonomous churches|this list]], i.e., the Mainstream Chalcedonian churches. Metr. John is not a controversial figure by any means, and the article should reflect that. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 02:37, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: I dod not provide any link to Bishop Ignjatije. Please stop telling false stories. Also, &quot;resistance&quot; Orthodox are in dogmatics same as Orthodox, which makes them valid in their criticisms. What they differ about is heresy over all heresies - ecumenism, and masonic infux into Orthodoxy - [[Meletios IV (Metaxakis) of Constantinople]]. It appears that those who praise Paris school of &quot;orthodoxy&quot; support ecumenism, and logically, regard &quot;reistance&quot; Orthodox as lesser Orthodox than Vatican! [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 02:47, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: If I am mistaken in how I read the OrthoWiki history page on the article, my apology. But it seems to say you created that link at 21:53 on May 2, 2008: http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=Ignatije_%28Midic%29_of_Pozarevac_and_Branicevo&amp;diff=65572&amp;oldid=42851<br />
--[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 02:54, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]], all of this is essentially irrelevant. The do-it-yourself &quot;Celtic Orthodox&quot; gent who lives near here and visits our church every so often is also quite likely &quot;in dogmatics same as Orthodox,&quot; but I'm not about to interview him for this article.<br />
<br />
:: The point is that what the &quot;resistance/True/Genuine/Traditionalist/etc.&quot; groups think is only of relatively small importance on most OrthodoxWiki articles. Whatever one may think of the so-called &quot;Paris School&quot; (whatever that may mean&amp;mdash;does that simply mean St. Sergius Institute?), it currently is part of and accepted by mainstream Orthodoxy, while by comparison the &quot;resistance/True/Genuine/Traditionalist/etc.&quot; groups are fringe. Their opinions on Metr. John are irrelevant. Perhaps if one of them had engaged in some major debate with him, they might be relevant.<br />
<br />
:: One doesn't have to be an &quot;ecumenist&quot; or a Freemason or an Ultramontanist sympathizer in order to see that giving undue weight to the opinions of such folks is essentially a violation of the explicit bias of OrthodoxWiki. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 02:57, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::: I repeat - I did not produce any link related to Bishop Ignjatije. All I did on his page was to convert section listing his writings from latin into cyrillic. <br />
<br />
::: It appears to me that both of you want to minimize amount and extent of the criticisms for some reason. Can you provide a valid reason for your attempts to blind the public? [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:08, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::: It's not a question of eliminating criticism (OrthodoxWiki articles are replete with descriptions of criticism, which is clear from even a cursory browsing of the site)&amp;mdash;it's where it's coming from and how much is actually appropriate to represent the mainstream view on the subject matter. Piling an article high with criticisms from fringe sources is not consistent with the policies of OrthodoxWiki, nor does it do anyone a service. &quot;The public&quot; are not &quot;blinded&quot; by an attempt to write balanced articles consistent with OrthodoxWiki policies. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font size=&quot;3.5&quot; color=&quot;green&quot; face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;Fr. Andrew&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;small&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;font face=&quot;Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman&quot;&gt;('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/small&gt; 03:11, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::: I have a problem with your statements simply because all of the disputes I had here were about same thing - constant denial of the criticisms from several individuals who disguise their denial under the mask of &quot;policies&quot;, &quot;encyclopedia&quot;, &quot;POV/NPOV&quot;, etc. What is balanced for you? To praise his work on two pages, and then mention critics in a mild form just to satisfy annoyances like myself? [[User:Cebactokpatop|Cebactokpatop]] 03:20, May 3, 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Just a thought ==<br />
<br />
It seems to me that this article is basically supposed to be a biographical introduction to Metr. John. While mention of the variety of opinions expressed about his work can, and probably should, be mentioned, it seems to me that this is not the proper forum for a detailed discussion (and listing) of these opinions. Half of the article, as it stands, is concerned with criticism and responses to that criticism and that seems rather unbalanced for something that is trying to be an encyclopedic entry. <br />
<br />
I am not sure where a discussion of all these opinions should take place, or even whether OrthodoxWiki is the right forum for such a discussion. It just seems to me that this particular page is not the place for it.<br />
<br />
Just my two cents, and with this I leave this debate.<br />
<br />
In the risen Christ,<br />
[[User:Vandrona|Fr. Peter]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Talk:SexTalk:Sex2007-04-19T17:10:01Z<p>Vandrona: contributions/clean-up tag deleted again w/o explanation...</p>
<hr />
<div>Is there a reason why the cleanup tag, wiki formatting, and grammar editing have been taken out and replaced by what seems to be basically the originally posted article? [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 04:17, March 6, 2007 (PST)<br />
:It looks like the original poster came back with corrections and re-posted a updated article. This wiped out the edits by others. The original poster may not have known that the article was updated. <br />
<br />
:'''To he original poster:''' Please keep in mind that this is a community project. Always edit the latest version of an article. If you have a work in progress, please use the [[Template:Inprogress]] template. [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 05:14, March 6, 2007 (PST)<br />
<br />
:It doesn't seem to have helped. My contributions to the article were deleted, together with the cleanup tag, without an explanation. [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 10:10, April 19, 2007 (PDT)</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Environmental_ethicsEnvironmental ethics2007-03-28T16:58:37Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Environmental ethics''' is the part of environmental philosophy which considers the ethical relationship between human beings and the natural environment, according to the Wikipedia definition (28 February 2007). This article will attempt to describe environmental ethics from the perspective of Orthodox theology, by exploring [[patristic]] and contemporary thought together with [[Scripture|scriptural]] and liturgical evidence regarding a theology of creation. In order to present the theological foundation of environmental ethics, we begin by examining the place of material creation within the whole of created order. From that foundation, we continue with theological consideration of the relationship between man and material creation, and conclude with some practical aspects of this relationship.<br />
<br />
==The Place of Material Creation in the Created Order==<br />
<br />
Christianity is often blamed for the environmental problems that the world is facing today. The accusation hinges on a particular understanding of [[Genesis]] 1:26 and 1:28:<br />
<br />
:''Then [[God]] said, &quot;Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. [...] God blessed them and said to them, &quot;Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.&quot; <br />
<br />
In one interpretation, the two verses above are understood to say that man has been given power over the earth to modify it according to his will. Some support for this world view can be gathered from the writings of some [[Church Fathers]]. [[Origen]] in the East and St. [[Augustine of Hippo]] in the West each held the view that the material world would not be a part of the Kingdom of God. For St. Augustine, this meant that in the Kingdom only human souls would be present. In contrast to the eternal soul, a temporary material creation is diminished in importance, resulting in an anthropocentric relationship between man and nature. This approach has also, at times, been predominant in Orthodox countries. In Eastern Europe, for example, under communism the lack of oversight led to high levels of air and water-pollution (e.g., the Black Sea - cf. &quot;How to Save the Black Sea&quot;, http://www.undp.org/gef/new/blacksea.htm, United Nations Development Programme), as well as overexploitation of land resources (e.g. in mining. Today, as we shall shortly see, Orthodox theologians are recovering the fullness of their theology, recognizing the presence of God in the whole of creation, and outlining the responsibilities we have towards that creation.<br />
<br />
The understanding of material creation as illustrated above is, at the very least, incomplete. Several Fathers, including Methodios of Olympus and St. [[Maximus the Confessor]], affirmed the value of creation and the cosmological dimension of the Kingdom of God. Anestes Keselopoulos, in his study on St. [[Symeon the New Theologian]], makes a powerful statement about the participation of nature in the Kingdom: &quot;Belief in the ultimate transfiguration and renewal of the world offers a real possibility for extending the theology of holy relics to the rest of creation. At the Second Coming, [...] the whole of material creation will be renewed as well. Material objects that surround the saints participate in sanctification. (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a study of St. Symeon the New Theologian&quot;)<br />
<br />
[[Psalm]] 104, read at every [[Vespers]] service, speaks of God's continued work in creation: <br />
<br />
:''&quot;You are clothed with honour and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent, you set the beams of your chambers on the waters, you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the wind, you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. You cause the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for people to use, to bring forth food from the earth, and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine, and bread to strengthen the human heart. The trees of the Lord are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.&quot;<br />
<br />
Scriptural, patristic, and liturgical evidence also provide a much richer picture of the role of material creation. This role includes praise of the Creator and joy at His work: &quot;Let heaven and earth praise Him, the seas and all that move in them&quot; (Ps. 69:34); &quot;The heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones&quot; (Ps. 89:5); &quot;Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad&quot; (Resurrectional [[apolytikion]], tone Pl. 1); &quot;let all creation bless and extol the Lord and let it exalt Him supremely to the ages&quot; (Eirmos of the eighth ode of the [[Canon_%28hymn%29|katavasiae]] for [[Christmas]]). [[Archimandrite]] Vasileios in &quot;Ecology and [[Monasticism]]&quot; states that the [[Pascha|Paschal]] hymns represent reality for the Orthodox: &quot;all the trees of the forest are rejoicing today; their nature has been sanctified because the Body of Christ was stretched upon a tree.&quot; <br />
<br />
Material creation also helps provide the means by which God interacts with, sanctifies and heals the world. [[Old Testament]] examples include the snake made by [[Moses]] (Numbers 21:8-9) and Balaam's donkey (Numbers 22:21-30) while some relevant [[New Testament]] passages are the stirring of the waters at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-5), [[Jesus]]' [[baptism]] in the River Jordan (Matthew 3:13-17), and St. [[Apostle_James_the_Just|James]]' exhortation that the elders anoint those who are ill with oil to aid in their healing (James 5:14). The hymnography of the Church also portrays creation as a co-worker with God: &quot;the earth offers a cave to Him Whom no man can approach&quot; (Christmas kontakion).<br />
<br />
==The [[Seventh Ecumenical Council]]==<br />
<br />
The issue of the nature of material creation and its role within the cosmos - in the form of the debate over the acceptability of icons - was the main concern of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. The iconoclast party argued that matter, &quot;found in a 'fallen' state and alienated from God, cannot possibly become a means expressive of truth, and especially of saving and divine truth.&quot; (Giakalis, Images of the Divine). The iconophile position, affirmed in the documents of the council, stated that essentially matter is &quot;God's creation&quot; and &quot;very good&quot; (Gen 1:13), but after the fall it can be either honored or abused. In the latter situation, &quot;[t]he iconophiles observe that in these cases matter is truly unable to co-operate in the business of man's salvation and cannot become a means and instrument of expression of truth. Nevertheless, nothing is capable of alienating matter entirely from its original divine provenance and making it essentially &quot;evil.&quot;&quot; (Gialakis, Images of the Divine, p.65). An illustration of this comes from the second volume of the acts of the sixth session: &quot;Thus, the art of painting, if used in order to depict obscenities, is despicable and harmful. [...] But if we want to paint the life-stories of virtuous men, the narratives of the contests of the martyrs and the explanation of their sufferings, as well as the mystery of the dispensation of God almighty and our Saviour, and if in these cases we use the art of the painters, we find ourselves doing something which is wholly proper.&quot; (Sahas, &quot;Icon and Logos&quot;).<br />
<br />
Thus, we see that the Orthodox tradition affirms that creation has value in itself, by virtue of its being created by God, praising God, and working together with God. In this context the Orthodox tradition regarding the relationship between man and nature falls mainly along two related and somewhat overlapping lines of thought. The first bases this relationship on the idea of man as a microcosm, while the second identifies man as the &quot;priest of creation.&quot;<br />
<br />
==The Relationship between Man and Material Creation==<br />
===Man as a microcosm===<br />
<br />
The idea of man as a microcosm is most commonly associated with St. Maximos the Confessor. In his Mystagogia he speaks of an indissoluble relationship and unity between man and world: &quot;[St. Paul] put forward another suggestion, along the lines of the same imagery, that the whole world of visible and invisible things can be thought of as a man; and man, made up of body and soul, as a world&quot; (Mystagogia, Chapter 7). Lars Thunberg, in his &quot;Man and the Cosmos&quot; describes St. Maximos' understanding of man as a microcosm by virtue of his constitution and for the purpose of mediation. Being both material and spiritual, all things in the world are reflected in man, who then has the vocation to bring together mortal and immortal creatures, rational and non-rational beings. However, St. Maximos does not view this vocation of man in separation from God. Rather, he states that it is Christ who achieved this unity. Again Thunberg, analyzing the Ambigua, says that man needs to leave the sphere of creation behind and be united with God beyond his own nature. Thus, man's mission in relation to creation can only be fulfilled in and through Christ: &quot;Man created in the image of God is thus, according to Maximus, a key to understanding creation not only in order that he may understand it as it is, but also that by actively understanding it in his process of divinization he may elevate it to the supreme level of its full soteriological comprehension (Ambigua 10).&quot; (Thunberg, &quot;Man and the Cosmos, p.76)<br />
<br />
St. [[Gregory of Nyssa]] also uses the image of man as microcosm, though his use of the expression is rather less uniform than for St. Maximus. In his conception, the parallelism seems to be limited to a common praise of God: &quot;as the cosmos continuously lifts up a hymn of praise to God, so it is the duty of man to engage in continual psalmody and hymnody.&quot; Metr. Paulos Gregorios postulates that St. Gregory's reservation regarding a more in-depth parallelism stemmed from a concern that man's high standing within creation not be attributed to his similarity to the universe (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man&quot;). However, St. Gregory also views man as a mediator between creation and God whose mediation is made possible by the incarnation: &quot;in Christ, Man, and through Man the whole creation, directly and without intermediaries participates in the creative energies of God Himself&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man, p.103).<br />
<br />
Fr. Stanley Harakas summarizes the Orthodox position thus far: &quot;[t]he creation exists for the use of humanity; but humanity exists as a microcosm to sanctify creation and to draw it into the fullness of the life of the kingdom of God, to bring it into communion with its maker.&quot; (''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.73) <br />
<br />
While both St. Maximus and St. Gregory note that the mediation of man is directly related to Christ's incarnation, the details of that mediation are filled in by modern day theologians.<br />
<br />
===Man as Priest of Creation===<br />
<br />
The Genesis passage which started this article is open to other interpretations. An interpretation which gives man a certain responsibility towards the environment, presents the commission which was given to man as a stewardship. K.M. George in his essay &quot;Towards a Eucharistic Ecology&quot; points out that good stewardship, in the sense of the Greek 'oikonomos:'—manager or administrator of a house,—requires trustworthiness, dependability, and wisdom. He goes on to add: &quot;[w]e offer the creation as a thank-offering to God in liturgy&quot; (George, ''Towards a Eucharistic Theology'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrily of Creation&quot;, p.46) This statement contains within it the seed for the idea of that several contemporary theologians, among them [[Vigen Guroian]], Metr. Paulos Gregorios, and Metr. [[John_%28Zizioulas%29_of_Pergamon]], consider as the most important in defining man's relationship to creation: man as 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
Metr. Paulos Gregorios of the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East, who was one of the most ardent advocates of Christian ecology wrote, &quot;Nature, man, and God are not three disjunct realities on the stage with a space-interval between their respective boundaries. [...] Christ has become part of creation, and in his created body he lifted up the creation to God, and humankind must participate in this eternal priesthood of Christ&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;The Human Presence&quot;) Metr. John Zizioulas adds: &quot;The priest is the one who takes in his hands the world to refer it to God and who, in return brings God's blessing to what he refers to God. Through this act creation is brought into communion with God himself. [...] This role of the human being as the priest of creation, is absolutely necessary for creation itself, because without this reference of creation to God the whole created universe will die.&quot; He goes on to argue that ethics, as commonly understood, cannot provide a solution for the environmental problem; this is the place of the Church. Metr. John argues that the solution to the environmental problem cannot be based on a set of impersonal principles. What is needed, rather is a particular way of life based on relationships with one another, with the material world, and with God. Specifically, the Metropolitan mentions fasting, respect for the material world and acknowledgement (within the Liturgy) that creation belongs to God, as specific means by which the Church can effect change (Zizioulas, ''Man the Priest of Creation: A Response to the Ecological Problem,'' in &quot;Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World&quot;). <br />
<br />
The exercise of this priesthood encompasses both our lives within the church temple (the Liturgy) and outside of it (the liturgy before/after the liturgy).<br />
<br />
==Man and Material Creation: Practical Aspects==<br />
<br />
Within the liturgical context, the Church provides prayers for the blessing of material goods such as homes, crops, vehicles. There are prayers asking for rain and for deliverance from earthquakes and other calamities. We see the presence of God everywhere in creation and we ask for His help in every endeavor. Partially in acknowledgment of that fact and partially in response to the ecological crisis, [[Monk]] Gerasimos of the Skete of Saint Anne has composed a Vespers for the preservation of creation. (&quot;Suppliant prayers offered the Author of all creation for the protection of the environment&quot;, Ecumenical Patriarchate 2001) Even earlier, in 1934, [[Metropolitan]] Tryphon Turkestanov had composed an [[Akathist]] in Praise of God's Creation.<br />
<br />
Additionally, the prayers of the Lesser Blessing of the Waters include the following petitions:<br />
<br />
* That this water might be hallowed by the might, and operation, and descent of the [[Holy Spirit]]; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may descend upon these waters the cleansing operation of the supersubstantial [[Trinity]]; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That this water may be to the healing of souls and bodies, and to the banishment of every hostile power; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may be sent down upon it the [[Grace]] of Redemption, the blessing of the Jordan; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
In the prayer of sanctification of the same service, the priest asks: &quot;Do You, the same Lord and King Who loves mankind, Who has granted to us to clothe ourselves in the garment of snowy whiteness, by water and by Spirit: send down on us Your blessing, and through the partaking of this water, through sprinkling with it, wash away the defilement of passions.&quot;<br />
<br />
These services and prayers illustrate one necessary aspect of our relationship with creation: prayer for the well-being and sanctification of the world. It is our role as mediators between creation and God to ask for God's action in behalf of the world which &quot;not of its own will&quot; has been subjected to corruption. (Archimandrite Vasileios, &quot;Monasticism and Ecology&quot;, cf. Romans 8:20)<br />
<br />
God's action in creation and creation's role in our journey towards God culminate in the gifts of bread and wine which are brought forth to be consecrated to become the Holy Body and Blood of Christ. In the [[Eucharist]], man, as the priest of creation, offers creation back to the Creator and then receives it back sanctified and transformed into the very God to Whom it was offered. As Orthodox we believe that the Eucharist sanctifies the whole creation. As Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis has said, in the Eucharist we embrace in prayer the whole creation and no longer seek our salvation apart from the world. (Dogmatics I class notes: http://vandrona.xwiki.com/xwiki/bin/view/Main/dogmatics101705)<br />
<br />
In practical terms, needs to be analyzed in connection with other, related ethical issues. While there are several actions which have a direct effect on the environmental problem (e.g., recycling, re-use of materials such as plastic bags), the greater issue of the environment encompasses many facets of life.<br />
<br />
The problem of pollution is not new (Diamond, &quot;Guns, Germs and Steel&quot;). However, in the past, local circumstances were directly connected to pollution (e.g., cities in antiquity often had to contend with water pollution) and therefore the overall incidence of pollution was relatively small. (Rodney Stark, &quot;The Rise of Christianity&quot;, chapter 4) Contemporary environmental problems, on the other hand, have led to a generalization of the problem. Currently, the main cause of the environmental problem is the increase in the consumption of goods in Western society over the last two centuries, coupled with economic development without a corresponding concern for the disposal of resulting waste and the care and renewal of the natural raw materials needed to create the goods. For a true solution to the environmental crisis, both sides of this main cause need to be addressed and progress is being made. Indeed, recently the relationship between environment and economy has begun to be viewed as symbiotic. Jane Jacobs, for example, states that &quot;ecology is the 'economy of nature'&quot; and that &quot;it's important [that economists] learn from nature and apply the knowledge to what they do.&quot; (Jane Jacobs, &quot;The Nature of Economies&quot;, p.10). This view change, however, is only in its beginnings and the Church has an important role to play in its continuation.<br />
<br />
On the one hand, the Church needs to support efforts which are aimed at finding better waste-management system, more efficient technologies and at the replenishment of natural resources (e.g, reforestation efforts). In this spirit, Anestis Keselopoulos states: &quot;The slogan of a return to some pre-scientific civilization is today not merely a utopia, but may be a disaster for humanity. When man loses his ability to overcome nature, he does not attain to a true relationship with nature, nor does he preserve its purpose; he simply achieves a vegetative' state. This word does not denote man's return to nature, but his identification with nature in the realm of decay and death.&quot; (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian,&quot; p.60-61)<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the biggest contribution of the Church is her understanding of the need for an ascetic component to every person's life. In terms of material goods, the Church has never embraced the slogan that &quot;more is better.&quot; While not dismissing material possessions, she has always stressed that the true treasure is spiritual in nature. Thus, another responsibility of man in relation to creation is the implementation of this understanding into daily life. For the Church as a body, the responsibility translates into educating the world about the true value of possessions as a part of her ministry to God's creation.<br />
<br />
The report &quot;Orthodox Perspectives on Creation&quot; states that &quot;the contemporary world must repent for the abuses which we have imposed upon the natural world. In this context, we need to remember the Orthodox concept of repentance (metanoia), which implies a complete change of heart. We need, therefore, not only to acknowledge our past mistakes, but to take action first to stop further abuses, and then, wherever possible, to revert the damage already done. As Fr. Stanley Harakas states in &quot;The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues:&quot; &quot;[h]umanity must come to see itself as intimately related to the non-human creation, to see itself as one with it in deep and profound community with it.&quot; (Harakas, ''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', &quot;In Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.79)<br />
<br />
We started this look at an Orthodox perspective on environmental ethics by looking at the accusation that Christianity bears a great share of the responsibility for the current environmental problem. However, we have seen that the sanctification of creation is part and parcel of the mission of Christianity. Our attitude towards creation is well summarized by St. [[John of Damascus]] &quot;I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake, who willed to take His abode in matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God... [but] because God has filled it with His grace and power.&quot; (On the Divine Images 1.16) <br />
<br />
==Articles on Environmental Issues==<br />
*[[Global Warming]]<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*''The Church, the Liturgy, and the Soul of Man : the Mystagogia of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by St. Maximus the Confessor, (St. Bede's Publications 1982)<br />
*''Cosmic Man: The Divine Presence : An Analysis of the Place and Role of the Human Race in the Cosmos, in Relation to God and the Historical World, in the Thought of St. Gregory of Nyssa (ca. 330 to ca. 395 A.D.)'', by Paulos Gregorios (Paragon House, 1988) (ISBN 0913757918)<br />
*''Ecology and monasticism'' by Archimadrite Vasileios of Stavronikita (Alexander Press 1996) (ISBN 1896800025)<br />
*''Guns, Germs and Steel'' by Jared Diamond<br />
*''The Human Presence : An Orthodox View of Nature'', by Paulos Gregorios (WCC, 1978) (ISBN 2825405752)<br />
*''Icon and Logos'' by Danel J. Sahas (University of Toronto Press 1986) (ISBN 0802056458)<br />
*''Images of the Divine: The Theology of Icons at the Seventh Ecumenical Council'' by Ambrosios Giakalis (E.J. Brill 1994) (ISBN 9004099468)<br />
*''Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Insights from Orthodox'', Gennadios Limouris, Ed.(WCC Publications, 1990) (ISBN 2825409790)<br />
*''Man and the Cosmos : the Vision of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by Lars Thunberg (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press 1985) (ISBN 0881410195)<br />
*''Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian'', by Anestes Keselopoulos (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001) (ISBN 088141221X)<br />
*''The Nature of Economies'' by Jane Jacobs (Random House, 2000) (ISBN 0679603409)<br />
*''On the Divine Images'', by St. John of Damascus (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1980) (ISBN 0913836621)<br />
*''Vespers for the Protection of the Environment'', by Monk Gerasimos of Little St. Anne (Narthex Press 2001) <br />
<br />
<br />
==Other helpful articles==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/miscellaneous.htm#environment Articles on the Environment] from the [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org Orthodox Research Institute] <br />
<br />
*[http://www.ec-patr.gr/docdisplay.php?lang=en&amp;cat=10 Ecological Activities of the Ecumenical Patriarchate] from the [http://www.ec-patr.gr/default.php?lang=en Official Ecumenical Patriarchate Website]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/SexSex2007-03-08T14:03:09Z<p>Vandrona: Genesis note</p>
<hr />
<div>In contemporary society, '''sex''' has been reduced to an instinctive act, used solely to bring forth pleasure. Even amongst some Orthodox Christians, a life of sex is the gauge by which a person's success is evaluated. Sex is promoted as something extremely less than a mystery because of the faithless understanding of the people. This secular understanding of sex erases the spiritual aspects of this holy union. Consequently, society has managed to break down the Christian understanding of this act, therefore making it acceptable for all to taste outside of marriage. For Orthodox Christians, “sexual relationships outside of the marital relationship violate the inherent nature of things for a person growing toward Theosis.”{{citation}} <br />
<br />
First, it is very important for all to understand and believe that sexual relations in marriage are not the only way to attain [[theosis]]. The Orthodox Church honors and highly reveres virginity, the state of [[Adam and Eve]] (hereafter referred to as &quot;the protoplasts&quot;) before their Fall. Contemporary society, however, gives such a state second-class honor. Celibacy and virginity as even labeled as “unnatural,” despite that, according the [[patristics|patristic tradition]] it is the natural state of the protoplasts before the Fall. In this essay, the issue of sex will be explained through the lenses of patristic tradition, the Orthodox understanding of the origin of humanity’s sexual nature, the appropriate manifestation of sexual nature through marriage, and the restoration of the fallen sexual nature through virginity. <br />
<br />
The origin of humanity’s sexual nature is found in the [[Old Testament]] book of [[Genesis]]. “God created male and female” (Genesis 5:2).{{citation|Which translation?}} However, after the fall there was a physical attraction between man and woman, which was supposed to lead to communion and union. <br />
<br />
In the patristic tradition, marriage is often connected with the fall of the protoplasts. [[Athanasius of Alexandria|Athanasius the Great]] remarks that in God's initial plan for man there was no marriage: “But the transgression of the commandment brought in marriage because Adam transgressed the law that was given to him by God. Adam’s fall, which resulted to death, created the need of putting on 'garments of skin'&quot; (Genesis 3:2). This garment is interpreted as man adapting to the condition that was created after the Fall and does not belong to the pre-Fall condition; it does not belong to the condition of the Kingdom of God. St. [[Gregory of Nyssa]] explains what the irrational skin is that man put on. He includes marital relations, procreation, food, growth, old age and death, all of which will not exist in the transformation and assimilation of humanity in the Kingdom of Heaven.<br />
<br />
However, this view of marriage is not the only one present in the patristic tradition. St. John Chrysostom, for example, says that &quot;“From the beginning God in His providence has planned this union of man and woman…. There is no relationship between human beings so close as that of husband and wife” (St. John Chrysostom, On Marriage and Family Life). It is noteworthy in this context that Genesis 2:24 (&quot;This is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body&quot; - NAB translation) comes before the description of the fall in Genesis 3.<br />
<br />
{{cleanup}}Until humanity reaches and lives for eternity in the Kingdom of Heaven, God has ordained marriage as a tool for salvation. Marriage is recognized as a sort of adaptation to the new condition of man that was created after the fall of the protoplasts. St. Paul in his first epistle to the Corinthians makes recommendations on how people can avoid fornication. According to the Apostle, true sexual relations can exist only within marriage, because sexuality is restored through marriage. In the Patristic tradition and in Holy Scripture this view is upheld, as it is seen in St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians. “… a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and they become on flesh.” St. Paul also says,<br />
<br />
:''“…each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again.”'' (1 Corinthians 7:2-5)<br />
<br />
It is important for one to understand that marriage is not a license for unlimited marital relations but an opportunity for asceticism. The ascetic character of the Christian life also covers the marital life of the believers. Purity, chastity, and even virginity are upheld through marriage according to St. John Chrysostom. Marriage as a communion of persons is not restricted to the level of matter and material sense. Contrarily, matter and material sense serve the communion of the person and in this way they acquire a spiritual content. The prayers of the marriage service clearly address this pastoral issue. The priest prays for the bed of the couple to remain “undefiled.” <br />
<br />
Sexual arousal, intercourse, and gratification must not be the priority of the couple; however, it is this act and pleasurable experience, which strengthens the bond of love between the couple, and assists the couple in growing closer to Christ. Fasting, prayer, continence, endurance of suffering is not only for monasticism, but also for married couples. The reason for this is, marriage is expected to move constantly from the carnal to the spiritual perspective. Such progress is only possible within the perspective of the couple’s perfection in Christ. The personal relations of the couple ought to be primarily spiritual in order to preserve and to increase their spiritual communion and union. This is the reason why there cannot exist an independent ethic of sexuality according to the divinely inspired Fathers of the Church.<br />
<br />
It is also important when speaking about sexual relations among spouses to speak about the product of this conjugal union. The creation of progeny is a natural consequence of marriage. There is a direct link between spouse relations and child bearing which should not be overlooked with a ''Italic text''light conscience. Child bearing is the fruit of the union of spouses and an expression of their participation in God’s creative work. St. John Chrysostom in reference the mystery of the conjugal union saying:<br />
<br />
:'' “And how become they one flesh? As if you should take the purest part of gold, and mingle it with the other gold; so in truth here also the women as it were receiving the richest part fused by pleasure, nourishes it and cherishes it, and throughout contributing her own share, restores it back to the man. And the child is a sort of bridge so that the three become on flesh, the child connecting, on either side, each to each… What then? When there is not child, will they not be two? Not so, for their coming together has this effect; it diffuse and commingles the bodies of both. And as one who has poured ointment into oil has made the whole one; so in truth is it also here.”'' <br />
<br />
St. John Chrysostom also says, “He created one from one, and again these two he makes one and thus He makes one; so that even now man is born from one. For a woman and a man are not two but one man” With this great gift of childbearing man becomes the donor of life. Clement the Alexandrian describes the progeny of man as, “man’s creation in God’s image.”<br />
<br />
Parallel to the married life, Christian tradition and ethics recognize another equally challenging and rewarding lifestyle. This lifestyle is dedicated and committed to virginity and purity in both aspects, the physical and spiritual. One may see this in the life of Jesus Christ, the proto-type of this lifestyle. Chrysostom says in regards to virginity, “I am persuaded that virginity is much more honorable than marriage, but this does not force me to place marriage amongst those that are dishonorable, but rather I praise it.” The acknowledgment of the value of marriage accentuates the superiority of virginity. Virginity supersedes the law, because it supersedes the fallen nature. A virginal life prefigures the life of the Kingdom of God, where carnal desires and secular cares do not exist.<br />
<br />
Virginity brings forth a vibrant life filled with eschatological expectation. Virginal life does not come into contradiction with marriage but it is its par excellence. St. Paul, although he refers to marriage as the “great mystery,” makes plain his preference for virginity, which is what he himself followed. Jesus Christ also says clearly in reference to virginity, is not for all to follow, but those whom this calling has been granted (Matthew 19:11). Choosing virginity places a human person above every social expediency or biological determinism, it underlines humanity’s freedom and absolute value. The human who practices a life of virginity lives as an angel, although having a body, lives like those among the bodiless powers. For this aforementioned reason; the possibilities of perfection following this lifestyle are numberless. On the contrary, the despising of marriage is an insult to the magnitude of virginity. In contrast to marriage, which serves death by brining forth children, virginity raises a barrier to its breaking and interrupting the transmission of the inherited obligation to death.<br />
<br />
The goals of virginity and virginal living are not just to remain free of carnal pleasure, but they aim to emancipate a believer from secular cares and straighten the persons’ orientations towards God. Consecrated virginity is a marriage with God that does not involve carnal pleasure. It is solely spiritual. One may say the marital relations of marriage are spiritual too, but they have a carnal aspect. In virginity, the voluntary self-exclusion from carnal pleasure does not aim to mortify Eros in the soul, but to transform it into a godly Eros. This virginity has its ultimate ontological reference to the Triune God.<br />
<br />
In conclusion, although the contemporary society has surrounded the faithful with images of sex and has enslaved the culture to it, the Church stands as a fiery column illuminating to all and enticing God-pleasing lifestyles. It is unfortunate contemporary thinking has infiltrated into to the Church, consequently many faithful to label virginity as “unnatural,” when in actuality it was natural to humanity before the fall. Regardless of modern situations, sexual relations are only appropriate within marriage. Marriage sanctifies and unites the carnal bond with the spiritual one, ultimately for the salvation of the couple. Marital relations are blessed because they unite the couple both spiritually and physical. Through this blessed experience, couples can become co-creators with God, grow closer to each other, tame their sexual desires, and ultimately attain Theosis. Although society promotes sexual immorality, namely fornication and adultery, Orthodox Christians must stand firm defending the sanctity of marriage and virginity.<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
*Stanely S. Harakas, ''Living the Faith'', Minneapolis, Minnesota<br />
*Homily on Colossians, X. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. XII, p. 304<br />
*Homily on Colossians Chapter 12, 5<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/SexSex2007-03-08T13:58:11Z<p>Vandrona: Added St. John Chrysostom's view of marriage as planned by God from the beginning</p>
<hr />
<div>In contemporary society, '''sex''' has been reduced to an instinctive act, used solely to bring forth pleasure. Even amongst some Orthodox Christians, a life of sex is the gauge by which a person's success is evaluated. Sex is promoted as something extremely less than a mystery because of the faithless understanding of the people. This secular understanding of sex erases the spiritual aspects of this holy union. Consequently, society has managed to break down the Christian understanding of this act, therefore making it acceptable for all to taste outside of marriage. For Orthodox Christians, “sexual relationships outside of the marital relationship violate the inherent nature of things for a person growing toward Theosis.”{{citation}} <br />
<br />
First, it is very important for all to understand and believe that sexual relations in marriage are not the only way to attain [[theosis]]. The Orthodox Church honors and highly reveres virginity, the state of [[Adam and Eve]] (hereafter referred to as &quot;the protoplasts&quot;) before their Fall. Contemporary society, however, gives such a state second-class honor. Celibacy and virginity as even labeled as “unnatural,” despite that, according the [[patristics|patristic tradition]] it is the natural state of the protoplasts before the Fall. In this essay, the issue of sex will be explained through the lenses of patristic tradition, the Orthodox understanding of the origin of humanity’s sexual nature, the appropriate manifestation of sexual nature through marriage, and the restoration of the fallen sexual nature through virginity. <br />
<br />
The origin of humanity’s sexual nature is found in the [[Old Testament]] book of [[Genesis]]. “God created male and female” (Genesis 5:2).{{citation|Which translation?}} However, after the fall there was a physical attraction between man and woman, which was supposed to lead to communion and union. <br />
<br />
In the patristic tradition, marriage is often connected with the fall of the protoplasts. [[Athanasius of Alexandria|Athanasius the Great]] remarks that in God's initial plan for man there was no marriage: “But the transgression of the commandment brought in marriage because Adam transgressed the law that was given to him by God. Adam’s fall, which resulted to death, created the need of putting on 'garments of skin'&quot; (Genesis 3:2). This garment is interpreted as man adapting to the condition that was created after the Fall and does not belong to the pre-Fall condition; it does not belong to the condition of the Kingdom of God. St. [[Gregory of Nyssa]] explains what the irrational skin is that man put on. He includes marital relations, procreation, food, growth, old age and death, all of which will not exist in the transformation and assimilation of humanity in the Kingdom of Heaven.<br />
<br />
However, this view of marriage is not the only one present in the patristic tradition. St. John Chrysostom, for example, says that &quot;“From the beginning God in His providence has planned this union of man and woman…. There is no relationship between human beings so close as that of husband and wife” (St. John Chrysostom, On Marriage and Family Life).<br />
<br />
{{cleanup}}Until humanity reaches and lives for eternity in the Kingdom of Heaven, God has ordained marriage as a tool for salvation. Marriage is recognized as a sort of adaptation to the new condition of man that was created after the fall of the protoplasts. St. Paul in his first epistle to the Corinthians makes recommendations on how people can avoid fornication. According to the Apostle, true sexual relations can exist only within marriage, because sexuality is restored through marriage. In the Patristic tradition and in Holy Scripture this view is upheld, as it is seen in St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians. “… a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and they become on flesh.” St. Paul also says,<br />
<br />
:''“…each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again.”'' (1 Corinthians 7:2-5)<br />
<br />
It is important for one to understand that marriage is not a license for unlimited marital relations but an opportunity for asceticism. The ascetic character of the Christian life also covers the marital life of the believers. Purity, chastity, and even virginity are upheld through marriage according to St. John Chrysostom. Marriage as a communion of persons is not restricted to the level of matter and material sense. Contrarily, matter and material sense serve the communion of the person and in this way they acquire a spiritual content. The prayers of the marriage service clearly address this pastoral issue. The priest prays for the bed of the couple to remain “undefiled.” <br />
<br />
Sexual arousal, intercourse, and gratification must not be the priority of the couple; however, it is this act and pleasurable experience, which strengthens the bond of love between the couple, and assists the couple in growing closer to Christ. Fasting, prayer, continence, endurance of suffering is not only for monasticism, but also for married couples. The reason for this is, marriage is expected to move constantly from the carnal to the spiritual perspective. Such progress is only possible within the perspective of the couple’s perfection in Christ. The personal relations of the couple ought to be primarily spiritual in order to preserve and to increase their spiritual communion and union. This is the reason why there cannot exist an independent ethic of sexuality according to the divinely inspired Fathers of the Church.<br />
<br />
It is also important when speaking about sexual relations among spouses to speak about the product of this conjugal union. The creation of progeny is a natural consequence of marriage. There is a direct link between spouse relations and child bearing which should not be overlooked with a ''Italic text''light conscience. Child bearing is the fruit of the union of spouses and an expression of their participation in God’s creative work. St. John Chrysostom in reference the mystery of the conjugal union saying:<br />
<br />
:'' “And how become they one flesh? As if you should take the purest part of gold, and mingle it with the other gold; so in truth here also the women as it were receiving the richest part fused by pleasure, nourishes it and cherishes it, and throughout contributing her own share, restores it back to the man. And the child is a sort of bridge so that the three become on flesh, the child connecting, on either side, each to each… What then? When there is not child, will they not be two? Not so, for their coming together has this effect; it diffuse and commingles the bodies of both. And as one who has poured ointment into oil has made the whole one; so in truth is it also here.”'' <br />
<br />
St. John Chrysostom also says, “He created one from one, and again these two he makes one and thus He makes one; so that even now man is born from one. For a woman and a man are not two but one man” With this great gift of childbearing man becomes the donor of life. Clement the Alexandrian describes the progeny of man as, “man’s creation in God’s image.”<br />
<br />
Parallel to the married life, Christian tradition and ethics recognize another equally challenging and rewarding lifestyle. This lifestyle is dedicated and committed to virginity and purity in both aspects, the physical and spiritual. One may see this in the life of Jesus Christ, the proto-type of this lifestyle. Chrysostom says in regards to virginity, “I am persuaded that virginity is much more honorable than marriage, but this does not force me to place marriage amongst those that are dishonorable, but rather I praise it.” The acknowledgment of the value of marriage accentuates the superiority of virginity. Virginity supersedes the law, because it supersedes the fallen nature. A virginal life prefigures the life of the Kingdom of God, where carnal desires and secular cares do not exist.<br />
<br />
Virginity brings forth a vibrant life filled with eschatological expectation. Virginal life does not come into contradiction with marriage but it is its par excellence. St. Paul, although he refers to marriage as the “great mystery,” makes plain his preference for virginity, which is what he himself followed. Jesus Christ also says clearly in reference to virginity, is not for all to follow, but those whom this calling has been granted (Matthew 19:11). Choosing virginity places a human person above every social expediency or biological determinism, it underlines humanity’s freedom and absolute value. The human who practices a life of virginity lives as an angel, although having a body, lives like those among the bodiless powers. For this aforementioned reason; the possibilities of perfection following this lifestyle are numberless. On the contrary, the despising of marriage is an insult to the magnitude of virginity. In contrast to marriage, which serves death by brining forth children, virginity raises a barrier to its breaking and interrupting the transmission of the inherited obligation to death.<br />
<br />
The goals of virginity and virginal living are not just to remain free of carnal pleasure, but they aim to emancipate a believer from secular cares and straighten the persons’ orientations towards God. Consecrated virginity is a marriage with God that does not involve carnal pleasure. It is solely spiritual. One may say the marital relations of marriage are spiritual too, but they have a carnal aspect. In virginity, the voluntary self-exclusion from carnal pleasure does not aim to mortify Eros in the soul, but to transform it into a godly Eros. This virginity has its ultimate ontological reference to the Triune God.<br />
<br />
In conclusion, although the contemporary society has surrounded the faithful with images of sex and has enslaved the culture to it, the Church stands as a fiery column illuminating to all and enticing God-pleasing lifestyles. It is unfortunate contemporary thinking has infiltrated into to the Church, consequently many faithful to label virginity as “unnatural,” when in actuality it was natural to humanity before the fall. Regardless of modern situations, sexual relations are only appropriate within marriage. Marriage sanctifies and unites the carnal bond with the spiritual one, ultimately for the salvation of the couple. Marital relations are blessed because they unite the couple both spiritually and physical. Through this blessed experience, couples can become co-creators with God, grow closer to each other, tame their sexual desires, and ultimately attain Theosis. Although society promotes sexual immorality, namely fornication and adultery, Orthodox Christians must stand firm defending the sanctity of marriage and virginity.<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
*Stanely S. Harakas, ''Living the Faith'', Minneapolis, Minnesota<br />
*Homily on Colossians, X. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. XII, p. 304<br />
*Homily on Colossians Chapter 12, 5<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Talk:SexTalk:Sex2007-03-06T12:17:01Z<p>Vandrona: New page: Is there a reason why the cleanup tag, wiki formatting, and grammar editing have been taken out and replaced by what seems to be basically the originally posted article? ~~~~</p>
<hr />
<div>Is there a reason why the cleanup tag, wiki formatting, and grammar editing have been taken out and replaced by what seems to be basically the originally posted article? [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 04:17, March 6, 2007 (PST)</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:InisteaUser talk:Inistea2007-03-05T23:35:31Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}}<br />
<br />
[[User:Gabriela|Gabriela]] 20:40, December 7, 2006 (PST)<br />
<br />
== ro.orthodoxwiki==<br />
<br />
Voi incerca sa ajut din cand in cand, parinte. Din pacate cursurile imi cam dau de cap deocamdata. Spuneti-mi insa ce credeti ca ar trebui sa fie de cea mai mare prioritate si voi incepe de acolo. Sotia ma roaga sa va intreb daca vreti paginile de calendar sa fie legate interwiki. [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 15:35, March 5, 2007 (PST)</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ASDamickUser talk:ASDamick2007-03-05T23:31:37Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>&lt;div class=&quot;boilerplate&quot; id=&quot;stub&quot; style=&quot;margin: 0 auto; text-align: center; background: #EEEEEE; padding: 0 10px; border: 1px solid #CCC; width: 60%; align: center&quot;&gt;'''Fr. Andrew''' is currently in semi-retirement from OrthodoxWiki, so he may only be sporadically available and generally fairly inactive. Please remember him in your prayers.&lt;/div&gt;<br />
<br />
* [[/Archive 1|Archive 1]] (Dec. 18, 2004 - June 17, 2005)<br />
* [[/Archive 2|Archive 2]] (July 5, 2005 - Dec. 15, 2005)<br />
* [[/Archive 3|Archive 3]] (Dec. 23, 2005 - Aug. 2, 2006)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== Baby ==<br />
<br />
Congratulations to you both! We are expecting our little baby girl in mid-October 2006. We might have to swap tips! [[User:Joe Rodgers|&amp;#123;&amp;#123;User:Joe Rodgers/sig}}]] 23:48, August 5, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Working on Bishop Basil entry ==<br />
<br />
Dear ASDamick,<br />
<br />
Thank you for your recent changes to the article on [[Basil (Osborne) of Amphipolis]]. I'm glad to see us working on this text together. I would like to see it accurately and dispassionately reflect the full state of affairs surrounding this bishop. I think that most of your revisions to my recent update of the text have been very helpful - again, my many thanks for them.<br />
<br />
A few points that I think still need some further consideration:<br />
<br />
* ''Title:'' The title 'Bishop of Amphipolis' is contested, and highly controversial. It doesn't seem appropriate for the OrthodoxWiki article on the bishop to take a definitive side one way or the other on this matter. I had altered the text to address this, which you refined nicely. However, I do think it appopriate that the issue is left relatively open, by simply referring to him as 'Bishop Basil' in most cases (e.g. in the caption under the photograph). The title of the article gives him the title 'Bishop of Amphipolis' already, which points things in a certain reading; but I think we need to be wary of giving 'our own blessing' to a matter that is disputed amongst the patriarchates.<br />
<br />
* ''Nature of the bishop's retirement:'' I've corrected the paragraph on the nature of the bishop's forced retirement. This was not made because he sought reception in the EP, but because he sought to do so preemptorily, without canonical release and order.<br />
<br />
* ''Title in summary box:'' In line with my point above on the bishop's title, I think it is only fair / accurate to return the small footnote qualifier on the title in the summary box at the bottom. Not to do so seems to claim, in the article, that the matter is disputed and open, only to go on in the summary information to present it as a closed/decided issue. I think in fairness to the actual situation, this small flag is warranted and not in itself a bias (cf. for example the summary boxes on autocephalous churches on Wikipedia, where a small asterisk is used next to churches whose autocephaly is disputed by some).<br />
<br />
I've made edits to the article this morning to account for the above points; I hope they're in general things you approve of (I've made them as separate edits, so you can see the progression).<br />
<br />
--[[User:Antonios aigyptos|Antonios]] 07:08, August 6, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Edit count ==<br />
<br />
''&quot;I'm currently in the lead and hoping I hit 10,000 first. (There's probably no prize, though.)&quot;''<br />
:I think we should throw a party. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
::Seen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof ? [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
<br />
==Bp [[Thomas (Joseph) of Oakland]]==<br />
Thanks for responding to the issue on my talk page; I fear that, in the mood I was in, my response would have been somewhat less than an exhibition of perfect charity. &amp;mdash; edited by [[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;green&quot;&gt;Pιs&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;gold&quot;&gt;τévο&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;''[[User talk:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]'' ''[[User talk:Pistevo/dev/null|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;complaints&lt;/font&gt;]]''&lt;/sup&gt; at 07:13, August 14, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Byzantine response to OCA autocephaly ==<br />
<br />
The bullet lists in [[Byzantine response to OCA autocephaly]]: Are they simply listing every single argument made by the Byzantine churches against OCA autocephaly? Because this one really boggles the mind:<br />
&quot; * Moscow's act is an attempt to extend Soviet influence into America. &quot;<br />
<br />
This was perhaps tossed out by someone, somewhere, at some time, in an effort to amass as many objections as possible, but it clearly has no bearing whatsoever on the current state of affairs (as the rest of the article appears to). I'm not going to edit it quit yet (since you put it in there), but a footnote or an external link might be appropriate. Otherwise, it's completely spurious except as a historical curiosity which has clearly proven to be laughable.<br />
--[[User:Basil|Basil]] 16:16, August 14, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree that documentation would be helpful. Historical arguments would be useful to keep in, as they do give some perspective on the historical relations between the two jurisdictions. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
<br />
==Return==<br />
A nice, subtle change that has not gone unnoticed. I look forward to your inactive partication! — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk])<br />
<br />
Welcome back, Deacon Andrew. I missed your discipline on keeping a consistent format for the articles. I mean this sincerely as I looked forward to your catching my &quot;typos&quot;. It had kept me on the 'ball' but I still needed a good editor. [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 13:57, October 9, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Congrats==<br />
I see you signed your last contribution &quot;Father Andrew.&quot; Congratulations on your ordination! [[User:Gabriela|Gabriela]] 22:31, October 30, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== corrupted letters ==<br />
<br />
In editing the page [[Timeline of Church History]] with minor edits, the link you added [[bg:Времева лини�? на църковната и�?тори�?]] became corrupted. I would fix it, but the corrupted letters do not display on any of my browsers even if I look at the history. - [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 10:04, November 7, 2006 (PST)<br />
<br />
:AFAIK, this is a known issue with an upgrade to MySQL 5. I'm not enough of a whiz to fix the problem, and the damage is minimal, so we'll have to do it manually... Sorry! — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk])<br />
<br />
== Interwiki ==<br />
<br />
Hi dear Father, I was leaving off the extra interwiki links for the Mian page until the additional localizations are ready for &quot;Beta&quot; stage, by which I mean that all the necessary documents have been translated... The &quot;release&quot; stage will then be when there are strong enough communities and moderation around these wikis to really launch them - i.e content and spam problems are dealt with quickly. — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk])<br />
<br />
==Metaxakis entry==<br />
Dear Father,<br />
Thank you for pointing out the issues of NPOV and MCB with the last edit I had entered. Of course I agree with having those standards for an encylopedic entry and I would like to see a better product along the lines you suggest. However I do have a few comments if i may.<br />
* I feel that the substance of what was written - about the agenda of the Pan Orthodox Congress of 1923 - actually was accurate and unbiased; after all history is history, and if those were the subjects that were tabled at that congress, it is a matter of history and a very important matter at that, and information which every Orthodox Christian today has a right to be informed and aware of. Im sure you agree that to simply list the items of the agenda as they were, is, I think is a neutral approach ''(i.e. &quot;here is what what was proposed in 1923: 1, 2, 3, 4,..etc, in fact seven changes in all.)'' Not sure how else to word that part of it, it is what it is; some subjects such as this particular example, may not be neutral in themselves, and for us to attempt to make them so or omit them risks the error of creating our own modern bias instead, a risk every historian is aware of. The writing of history must be impartial, whether the historical facts in themselves are or arent impartial to us is another matter. I agree that the source timeline that I located the information on would be NPOV/MCB, however as for the information in itself, it is either factual or it is isn't (fabricated)....in other words there was no editing or personal opinions presented with that list, just the list of proposals in 1923 itself . And I remember seeing a similar list of items (from the 1923 congress) years ago on an OCA site, which I cannot find now. And so for this reason I believe it is necessary and important to have this part included for the complete and unbiased picture.<br />
* As for the second section I had entered (comparative study), which included a link to a site which detailed things about Metaxakis' early Masonic involvement right down to his troubled death, yes it too did not come from a MCB site, and that will need to be re-worked as you commented, perhaps with more research from other sources; but it too presented disturbing details, which in themselves were by nature * not neutral * (i.e. if he attained 33rd degree in 1909 that's important; if he was buried with Masonic honours in 1935 that fact too is important). It is doubtful how much other written research exists on this subject, at least in English. <br />
At any rate I appreciate the direction. Would be interested in what you think. Cheers,<br />
Chris.<br />
<br />
== Thanks and congrats ==<br />
<br />
Dear Father, thank you for your friendly welcoming and congratulations for your ordination! --[[User:Cat68|Cat68]] 08:55, February 16, 2007 (PST)<br />
<br />
== HC invasion ==<br />
<br />
Yes, indeed, we have descended. Our social ethics project has been, basically, to make sure that there were articles written for just about every article under the Ethics section. This is the first phase, followed by a review by the professor, after which you can expect changes to these articles (whether or not they've been worked on by other people in the mean time). [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]]<br />
<br />
== Baby ==<br />
<br />
Congrat's on the birth of your first child!--[[User:AKCGY|AKCGY]] 15:08, March 5, 2007 (PST)<br />
<br />
Congratulations from the Andronaches, as well. Magda also wants me to add that she approves of March births :) [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 15:31, March 5, 2007 (PST)</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:VandronaUser:Vandrona2007-03-03T18:26:52Z<p>Vandrona: updating some verb tenses</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:VirgilPetrişorAndronache.jpg |thumb|right|Dn. Virgil]]<br />
My name is Dn. Virgil Petrişor Andronache. I am in my third year of studies at [[Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology (Brookline, Massachusetts)|Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology]]. My presence on orthodoxwiki is the work of my lovely wife, [[User:Magda|Magda]].<br />
<br />
For the 2006-2007 academic year, I am serving as a chant group leader, the secretary for the class of 2007, treasurer for the Married Student Association, and athletic activities contact between the student body and the administration.<br />
<br />
I was born in Bacau, Romania, in 1977, but I have been in the U.S. for eleven years. My life before the [[seminary]] involved most recently playing with robots at the University of Notre Dame [http://www.nd.edu/~airolab Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Lab]. <br />
<br />
Despite my wife's assertions, I am not that tall and not nearly that invulnerable.<br />
<br />
I have a [http://vandrona.blogspot.com personal blog] for general thoughts and a [http://vandrona.xwiki.com personal wiki] for class notes. <br />
<br />
My patron [[saint]] is &quot;tied to&quot; my middle name: St. [[Apostle Peter|Peter]] on [[June 29]].<br />
<br />
[[Category:User Pages|{{PAGENAME}}]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:GabrielaUser talk:Gabriela2007-03-03T04:37:20Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{welcome}}<br />
<br />
{{User:ASDamick/sig}} 15:32, May 2, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Addendum ==<br />
<br />
To the standard welcome I wanted to add an extra thank-you for helping to clean up existing articles. It's very much needed! {{User:ASDamick/sig}} 17:47, May 5, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Gabriel ==<br />
<br />
Excellent work on The [[Archangel Gabriel]] article! For future reference, you can use &quot;thumb&quot; instead of &quot;frame&quot; to take care of sizing an image. {{User:Magda/sig}} 12:32, May 9, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Sign of the Cross ==<br />
<br />
It looks like you have made some great contributions to this article. I think I imported this from Wikipedia some time ago. Welcome! [[User:Joe Rodgers|Joe]] 2006-05-10<br />
<br />
== Hagiographical articles, image licenses ==<br />
<br />
Since I definitely want to encourage your contributions, here are a few links which I have found useful:<br />
*[[Saint commemorations]]<br />
*[[OrthodoxWiki:Style Manual]] (specifically [[OrthodoxWiki:Style Manual (People)|People]] and [[OrthodoxWiki:Style Manual (Importing)|Importing]])<br />
<br />
Also, when importing images from the Wikimedia Commons, please keep in mind that we still need categories and licensing information for each image. (cf. [[Help:Image licenses]])<br />
<br />
Again (and again, in peace): good work! {{User:Magda/sig}} 12:48, May 17, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Ah, thank you, again. That is helpful. Honestly, the copyright stuff confuses me, but I'll try to note the image licences that wikimedia uses when I borrow images from them; also, I suppose the cut and paste from wikipedia and then slice and dice isn't an option. Whoops. I suppose I should start writing all the material in my articles by my own hand. [[User:Gabriela|Gabriela]] 15:36, 17 May, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Hotlinking ==<br />
<br />
Just FYI, in the images you've uploaded recently, when you include a bare URL to the image's source, the wiki creates a hotlink to the URL, including the image and thus using the linked site's bandwidth. If you want to link to the source without including the image (which is what would be preferable), then you can do it by means of creating a link, like this: [http://www.thehtm.org/images/a-73.jpg Source]. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Dcn. Andrew&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Randompage|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;random&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 21:23, June 7, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== RE: You have to read what you paste over from wikipedia ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for the note! I do read anything I &quot;paste&quot; before doing so. God Bless.<br />
<br />
== [[:Image:Rublev Trinity.jpg]] ==<br />
<br />
No harm done. In the future, if you want to revert an image to its proper state, look at the list of revisions on the image's description page (e.g., [[:Image:Rublev Trinity.jpg]]), click on the date references, find the one you want, and hit the &quot;rev&quot; link next to it. &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Dcn. Andrew&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Randompage|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;random&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 23:10, July 31, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
: It sounds to me like your browser cache needed to be refreshed. In some browsers, you have to hold down the shift key in order for this to work. I don't know what was happening in your particular case, but I'm pretty sure that there was a cache issue, if only because I know that the image was already fixed before you started in on it. :) &amp;mdash;[[User:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Dcn. Andrew&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;[[User_talk:ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Randompage|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;random&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; &lt;sup&gt;[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|&lt;font color=&quot;black&quot;&gt;contribs&lt;/font&gt;]]&lt;/sup&gt; 06:50, August 3, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Sysop Invite ==<br />
<br />
Dear Gabriela,<br />
<br />
I'd like to invite you to become an OrthodoxWiki sysop. This doesn't require much more time or commitment than you've already demonstrated. You'd be part of our ultra-secret OrthodoxWiki Sysop email list, where we work together to battle wiki-evil and talk about various issues affecting the life of OrthodoxWiki, and once in awhile bounce around ideas about its future. Also, you'd have superpowers on the wiki, allowing you to intervene in edit wars, and otherwise better manage articles. Finally, you'd be a reference point for other users - welcoming them in the name of OrthodoxWiki, and helping folks get the hang of the OrthodoxWiki style. Let me know if you'd like to accept this mission by leaving a note on my talk page or emailing me directly. Thanks, {{User:FrJohn/sig}}<br />
<br />
== Markup issues ==<br />
<br />
I've worked something out on [[User:Hellenica/Workshop/Gabriela|here]] for you, hope it's good enough! [[User:Hellenica|Hellenica]] 21:12, December 2, 2006 (PST)<br />
<br />
== Vandal alert ==<br />
<br />
Just thought I'd alert you to [[Joshua]], a recent vandalism addition. --[[User:Cholmes75|cholmes75]] 07:44, January 2, 2007 (PST)<br />
<br />
==Thank you==<br />
For the kind welcome. I have edited my user page a little. /hans<br />
<br />
PS: is this how I sign?: [[User:Hans|&lt;b&gt;Hans&lt;/b&gt;]]<br />
<br />
Thank you again [[User:Hans|Hans]] 07:50, February 27, 2007 (PST)<br />
<br />
== Ethics invasion ==<br />
<br />
Today is the due date for the first phase of a project for the Social Ethics class. Most of the posts in the last couple of days (that are not mine or my wife's) are related to that project. The two of us (she more than me) have been going through the articles and correcting formatting, grammar, and the like. Almost every sub-topic on the Ethics page has been assigned, so there could be a good number more articles coming up. Just a heads up. We'll check again in the morning. [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ASDamickUser talk:ASDamick2007-03-02T20:37:30Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>&lt;div class=&quot;boilerplate&quot; id=&quot;stub&quot; style=&quot;margin: 0 auto; text-align: center; background: #EEEEEE; padding: 0 10px; border: 1px solid #CCC; width: 60%; align: center&quot;&gt;'''Fr. Andrew''' is currently in semi-retirement from OrthodoxWiki, so he may only be sporadically available and generally fairly inactive. Please remember him in your prayers.&lt;/div&gt;<br />
<br />
* [[/Archive 1|Archive 1]] (Dec. 18, 2004 - June 17, 2005)<br />
* [[/Archive 2|Archive 2]] (July 5, 2005 - Dec. 15, 2005)<br />
* [[/Archive 3|Archive 3]] (Dec. 23, 2005 - Aug. 2, 2006)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== Baby ==<br />
<br />
Congratulations to you both! We are expecting our little baby girl in mid-October 2006. We might have to swap tips! [[User:Joe Rodgers|&amp;#123;&amp;#123;User:Joe Rodgers/sig}}]] 23:48, August 5, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Working on Bishop Basil entry ==<br />
<br />
Dear ASDamick,<br />
<br />
Thank you for your recent changes to the article on [[Basil (Osborne) of Amphipolis]]. I'm glad to see us working on this text together. I would like to see it accurately and dispassionately reflect the full state of affairs surrounding this bishop. I think that most of your revisions to my recent update of the text have been very helpful - again, my many thanks for them.<br />
<br />
A few points that I think still need some further consideration:<br />
<br />
* ''Title:'' The title 'Bishop of Amphipolis' is contested, and highly controversial. It doesn't seem appropriate for the OrthodoxWiki article on the bishop to take a definitive side one way or the other on this matter. I had altered the text to address this, which you refined nicely. However, I do think it appopriate that the issue is left relatively open, by simply referring to him as 'Bishop Basil' in most cases (e.g. in the caption under the photograph). The title of the article gives him the title 'Bishop of Amphipolis' already, which points things in a certain reading; but I think we need to be wary of giving 'our own blessing' to a matter that is disputed amongst the patriarchates.<br />
<br />
* ''Nature of the bishop's retirement:'' I've corrected the paragraph on the nature of the bishop's forced retirement. This was not made because he sought reception in the EP, but because he sought to do so preemptorily, without canonical release and order.<br />
<br />
* ''Title in summary box:'' In line with my point above on the bishop's title, I think it is only fair / accurate to return the small footnote qualifier on the title in the summary box at the bottom. Not to do so seems to claim, in the article, that the matter is disputed and open, only to go on in the summary information to present it as a closed/decided issue. I think in fairness to the actual situation, this small flag is warranted and not in itself a bias (cf. for example the summary boxes on autocephalous churches on Wikipedia, where a small asterisk is used next to churches whose autocephaly is disputed by some).<br />
<br />
I've made edits to the article this morning to account for the above points; I hope they're in general things you approve of (I've made them as separate edits, so you can see the progression).<br />
<br />
--[[User:Antonios aigyptos|Antonios]] 07:08, August 6, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Edit count ==<br />
<br />
''&quot;I'm currently in the lead and hoping I hit 10,000 first. (There's probably no prize, though.)&quot;''<br />
:I think we should throw a party. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
::Seen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof ? [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
<br />
==Bp [[Thomas (Joseph) of Oakland]]==<br />
Thanks for responding to the issue on my talk page; I fear that, in the mood I was in, my response would have been somewhat less than an exhibition of perfect charity. &amp;mdash; edited by [[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;green&quot;&gt;Pιs&lt;/font&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;gold&quot;&gt;τévο&lt;/font&gt;]] &lt;sup&gt;''[[User talk:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;talk&lt;/font&gt;]]'' ''[[User talk:Pistevo/dev/null|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;complaints&lt;/font&gt;]]''&lt;/sup&gt; at 07:13, August 14, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Byzantine response to OCA autocephaly ==<br />
<br />
The bullet lists in [[Byzantine response to OCA autocephaly]]: Are they simply listing every single argument made by the Byzantine churches against OCA autocephaly? Because this one really boggles the mind:<br />
&quot; * Moscow's act is an attempt to extend Soviet influence into America. &quot;<br />
<br />
This was perhaps tossed out by someone, somewhere, at some time, in an effort to amass as many objections as possible, but it clearly has no bearing whatsoever on the current state of affairs (as the rest of the article appears to). I'm not going to edit it quit yet (since you put it in there), but a footnote or an external link might be appropriate. Otherwise, it's completely spurious except as a historical curiosity which has clearly proven to be laughable.<br />
--[[User:Basil|Basil]] 16:16, August 14, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree that documentation would be helpful. Historical arguments would be useful to keep in, as they do give some perspective on the historical relations between the two jurisdictions. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
<br />
==Return==<br />
A nice, subtle change that has not gone unnoticed. I look forward to your inactive partication! — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk])<br />
<br />
Welcome back, Deacon Andrew. I missed your discipline on keeping a consistent format for the articles. I mean this sincerely as I looked forward to your catching my &quot;typos&quot;. It had kept me on the 'ball' but I still needed a good editor. [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 13:57, October 9, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Congrats==<br />
I see you signed your last contribution &quot;Father Andrew.&quot; Congratulations on your ordination! [[User:Gabriela|Gabriela]] 22:31, October 30, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== corrupted letters ==<br />
<br />
In editing the page [[Timeline of Church History]] with minor edits, the link you added [[bg:Времева лини�? на църковната и�?тори�?]] became corrupted. I would fix it, but the corrupted letters do not display on any of my browsers even if I look at the history. - [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 10:04, November 7, 2006 (PST)<br />
<br />
:AFAIK, this is a known issue with an upgrade to MySQL 5. I'm not enough of a whiz to fix the problem, and the damage is minimal, so we'll have to do it manually... Sorry! — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk])<br />
<br />
== Interwiki ==<br />
<br />
Hi dear Father, I was leaving off the extra interwiki links for the Mian page until the additional localizations are ready for &quot;Beta&quot; stage, by which I mean that all the necessary documents have been translated... The &quot;release&quot; stage will then be when there are strong enough communities and moderation around these wikis to really launch them - i.e content and spam problems are dealt with quickly. — [[User:FrJohn|&lt;b&gt;FrJohn&lt;/b&gt;]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new talk])<br />
<br />
==Metaxakis entry==<br />
Dear Father,<br />
Thank you for pointing out the issues of NPOV and MCB with the last edit I had entered. Of course I agree with having those standards for an encylopedic entry and I would like to see a better product along the lines you suggest. However I do have a few comments if i may.<br />
* I feel that the substance of what was written - about the agenda of the Pan Orthodox Congress of 1923 - actually was accurate and unbiased; after all history is history, and if those were the subjects that were tabled at that congress, it is a matter of history and a very important matter at that, and information which every Orthodox Christian today has a right to be informed and aware of. Im sure you agree that to simply list the items of the agenda as they were, is, I think is a neutral approach ''(i.e. &quot;here is what what was proposed in 1923: 1, 2, 3, 4,..etc, in fact seven changes in all.)'' Not sure how else to word that part of it, it is what it is; some subjects such as this particular example, may not be neutral in themselves, and for us to attempt to make them so or omit them risks the error of creating our own modern bias instead, a risk every historian is aware of. The writing of history must be impartial, whether the historical facts in themselves are or arent impartial to us is another matter. I agree that the source timeline that I located the information on would be NPOV/MCB, however as for the information in itself, it is either factual or it is isn't (fabricated)....in other words there was no editing or personal opinions presented with that list, just the list of proposals in 1923 itself . And I remember seeing a similar list of items (from the 1923 congress) years ago on an OCA site, which I cannot find now. And so for this reason I believe it is necessary and important to have this part included for the complete and unbiased picture.<br />
* As for the second section I had entered (comparative study), which included a link to a site which detailed things about Metaxakis' early Masonic involvement right down to his troubled death, yes it too did not come from a MCB site, and that will need to be re-worked as you commented, perhaps with more research from other sources; but it too presented disturbing details, which in themselves were by nature * not neutral * (i.e. if he attained 33rd degree in 1909 that's important; if he was buried with Masonic honours in 1935 that fact too is important). It is doubtful how much other written research exists on this subject, at least in English. <br />
At any rate I appreciate the direction. Would be interested in what you think. Cheers,<br />
Chris.<br />
<br />
== Thanks and congrats ==<br />
<br />
Dear Father, thank you for your friendly welcoming and congratulations for your ordination! --[[User:Cat68|Cat68]] 08:55, February 16, 2007 (PST)<br />
<br />
== HC invasion ==<br />
<br />
Yes, indeed, we have descended. Our social ethics project has been, basically, to make sure that there were articles written for just about every article under the Ethics section. This is the first phase, followed by a review by the professor, after which you can expect changes to these articles (whether or not they've been worked on by other people in the mean time). [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Environmental_ethicsEnvironmental ethics2007-03-02T18:03:26Z<p>Vandrona: typo, more wikification (final run through for me)</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Environmental ethics''' is the part of environmental philosophy which considers the ethical relationship between human beings and the natural environment, according to the Wikipedia definition (28 February 2007). This article will attempt to describe environmental ethics from the perspective of Orthodox theology, by exploring patristic and contemporary thought together with [[Scripture|scriptural]] and liturgical evidence regarding a theology of creation. We begin by examining the place of material creation within the whole of created order, continue with theological consideration regarding the relationship between man and material creation, and conclude with some practical aspects of this relationship.<br />
<br />
==The Place of Material Creation in the Created Order==<br />
<br />
Christianity is often blamed for the environmental problems that the world is facing today. The accusation hinges on a particular understanding of [[Genesis]] 1:26 and 1:28:<br />
<br />
:''Then [[God]] said, &quot;Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. [...] God blessed them and said to them, &quot;Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.&quot; <br />
<br />
In one interpretation, the two verses above are understood to say that man has been given power over the earth to modify it according to his will. Some support for this world view can be gathered from writings of some [[Church Fathers]]. [[Origen]] in the East and St. [[Augustine of Hippo]] in the West each held the view that the material world would not be a part of the Kingdom of God. For St. Augustine, this meant that in the Kingdom, only human souls would be present. In contrast to the eternal soul, a temporary material creation is diminished in importance, resulting in an anthropocentric relationship between man and nature. This approach has also, at times, been predominant in Orthodox countries. Today, as we shall shortly see, Orthodox theologians are recovering the fullness of their theology, recognizing the presence of God in the whole of creation, and outlining the responsibilities we have towards that creation.<br />
<br />
The understanding of material creation as illustrated above is, at the very least, incomplete. Several Fathers, including Methodios of Olympus and St. [[Maximus the Confessor]], affirmed the value of creation and the cosmological dimension of the Kingdom of God. Anestes Keselopoulos, in his study on St. [[Symeon the New Theologian]], makes a powerful statement about the participation of nature in the Kingdom: &quot;Belief in the ultimate transfiguration and renewal of the world offers a real possibility for extending the theology of holy relics to the rest of creation. At the Second Coming, [...] the whole of material creation will be renewed as well. Material objects that surround the saints participate in sanctification. (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a study of St. Symeon the New Theologian&quot;).<br />
<br />
[[Psalm]] 104, read at every [[Vespers]] service, speaks of God's continued work in creation: <br />
<br />
:''&quot;You are clothed with honour and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent, you set the beams of your chambers on the waters, you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the wind, you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. You cause the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for people to use, to bring forth food from the earth, and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine, and bread to strengthen the human heart. The trees of the Lord are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.&quot;<br />
<br />
Scriptural, patristic, and liturgical evidence also provide a much richer picture of the role of material creation. This role includes praise of the Creator and joy at His work: &quot;Let heaven and earth praise Him, the seas and all that move in them&quot; (Ps. 69:34), &quot;The heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones&quot; (Ps. 89:5), &quot;Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad&quot; (Resurrectional [[apolytikion]], tone Pl. 1), &quot;let all creation bless and extol the Lord and let it exalt Him supremely to the ages&quot; (Eirmos of the eighth ode of the [[Canon_%28hymn%29|katavasiae]] for [[Christmas]]). [[Archimandrite]] Vasileios in &quot;Ecology and [[Monasticism]]&quot; states that the [[Pascha|Paschal]] hymns represent reality for the Orthodox: &quot;all the trees of the forest are rejoicing today; their nature has been sanctified because the Body of Christ was stretched upon a tree.&quot; <br />
<br />
Material creation also helps provide the means by which God interacts with, sanctifies and heals the world. [[Old Testament]] examples include the snake made by [[Moses]] (Numbers 21:8-9) and Balaam's donkey (Numbers 22:21-30) while some relevant [[New Testament]] passages are the stirring of the waters at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-5), [[Jesus]]' [[baptism]] (Matthew 3:13-17), and St. [[Apostle_James_the_Just|James]]' exhortation that the elders anoint those who are ill with oil to aid in their healing (James 5:14). The hymnography of the Church also portrays creation as a co-worker with God: &quot;the earth offers a cave to Him Whom no man can approach&quot; (Christmas kontakion).<br />
<br />
Thus, we see that the Orthodox tradition affirms that creation has value in itself, by virtue of its being created by God, praising God, and working together with God. In this context the Orthodox tradition regarding the relationship between man and nature falls mainly along two related and somewhat overlapping lines of thought. The first bases this relationship on the idea of man as a microcosm, while the second identifies man as the 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
==The Relationship between Man and Material Creation==<br />
===Man as a microcosm===<br />
<br />
The idea of man as a microcosm is most commonly associated with St. Maximus the Confessor. In his Mystagogia he speaks of an indissoluble relationship and unity between man and world: &quot;[St. Paul] put forward another suggestion, along the lines of the same imagery, that the whole world of visible and invisible things can be thought of as a man; and man, made up of body and soul, as a world&quot; (Chapter 7). Lars Thunberg, in his &quot;Man and the Cosmos&quot; relates St. Maximus' understanding of man as a microcosm by constitution and for the purpose of mediation. Being both material and spiritual, all things in the world are reflected in man, who then has the vocation to bring together mortal and immortal creatures, rational and non-rational beings. However, St. Maximus does not view this vocation of man in separation from God. Rather, he states that it is Christ who achieved this unity. Again Thunberg, analyzing the Ambigua, says that man needs to leave the sphere of creation behind and be united with God beyond his own nature. Thus, man's mission in relation to creation can only be fulfilled in and through Christ: &quot;Man created in the image of God is thus, according to Maximus, a key to understanding creation not only in order that he may understand it as it is, but also that by actively understanding it in his process of divinization he may elevate it to the supreme level of its full soteriological comprehension (Ambigua 10).&quot; (Thunberg, &quot;Man and the Cosmos, p.76).<br />
<br />
St. [[Gregory of Nyssa]] also uses the image of man and microcosm, though his use of the expression is rather less uniform than for St. Maximus. In his conception, the parallelism seems to be limited to a common praise of God&quot;: as the cosmos continuously lifts up a hymn of praise to God, so it is the duty of man to engage in continual psalmody and hymnody.&quot; Metr. Paulos Gregorios postulates that St. Gregory's reservation regarding a more in-depth parallelism stemmed from a concern that man's high standing within creation not be attributed to his similarity to the universe (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man&quot;). However, St. Gregory also views man as a mediator, between creation and God, whose mediation is made possible by the incarnation: &quot;in Christ, Man, and through Man, the whole creation, directly and without intermediaries, participates in the creative energies of God Himself&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man, p.103).<br />
<br />
Fr. Stanley Harakas summarizes the Orthodox position thus far: &quot;[t]he creation exists for the use of humanity; but humanity exists as a microcosm to sanctify creation and to draw it into the fullness of the life of the kingdom of God, to bring it into communion with its maker.&quot; (''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.73) <br />
<br />
While both St. Maximus and St. Gregory note that the mediation of man is directly related to Christ's incarnation. the details of that mediation are filled in by modern day theologians.<br />
<br />
===Man as Priest of Creation===<br />
<br />
The Genesis passage which started this article is open to other interpretations. One such interpretation, which gives man a certain responsibility towards the environment, presents the commission which was given to man as a stewardship. K.M. George in his essay &quot;Towards a Eucharistic Ecology&quot; points out that good stewardship, in the sense of the Greek 'oikonomos:'—manager or administrator of a house,—requires trustworthiness, dependability, and wisdom. He goes on to add: &quot;[w]e offer the creation as a thank-offering to God in liturgy&quot; (George, ''Towards a Eucharistic Theology'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrily of Creation&quot;, p.46). This statement contains within it the seed for the idea of that several contemporary theologians, among them [[Vigen Guroian]], Metr. Paulos Gregorios, and Metr. [[John_%28Zizioulas%29_of_Pergamon]], consider as the most important in defining man's relationship to creation: man as 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
Metr. Paulos Gregorios of the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East and one of the most ardent advocates of Christian ecology wrote, &quot;Nature, man, and God are not three disjunct realities on the stage with a space-interval between their respective boundaries. [...] Christ has become part of creation, and in his created body he lifted up the creation to God, and humankind must participate in this eternal priesthood of Christ&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;The Human Presence&quot;). Metr. John Zizioulas adds: &quot;The priest is the one who takes in his hands the world to refer it to God and who, in return brings God's blessing to what he refers to God. Through this act creation is brought into communion with God himself. [...] This role of the human being as the priest of creation, is absolutely necessary for creation itself, because without this reference of creation to God the whole created universe will die.&quot; He goes on to argue that ethics, as commonly understood, cannot provide a solution for the environmental problem; this is the place of the Church. Specifically, the metropolitan mentions fasting, respect for the material world and acknowledgement (within the Liturgy) that creation belongs to God as specific means by which the Church can effect change (Zizioulas, ''Man the Priest of Creation: A Response to the Ecological Problem,'' in &quot;Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World&quot;). <br />
<br />
The exercise of this priesthood encompasses both our lives within the church temple (the Liturgy) and outside of it (the liturgy before/after the liturgy).<br />
<br />
==Man and Material Creation: Practical Aspects==<br />
<br />
Within the liturgical context, the Church provides prayers for the blessing of material goods: homes, crops, vehicles. There are prayers asking for rain and for deliverance from earthquakes and other calamities. We see the presence of God everywhere in creation and we ask for His help in every endeavour. Partially in acknowledgment of that fact and partially in response to the ecological crisis, [[Monk]] Gerasimos of the Skete of Saint Anne has composed a Vespers for the preservation of creation. Even earlier, in 1934, [[Metropolitan]] Tryphon Turkestanov had composed an [[Akathist]] in Praise of God's Creation.<br />
<br />
Additionally, the prayers of the Lesser Blessing of the Waters include the following petitions:<br />
<br />
* That this water might be hallowed by the might, and operation, and descent of the [[Holy Spirit]]; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may descend upon these waters the cleansing operation of the supersubstantial [[Trinity]]; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That this water may be to the healing of souls and bodies, and to the banishment of every hostile power; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may be sent down upon it the [[Grace]] of Redemption, the blessing of the Jordan; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
In the prayer of sanctification of the same service, the priest asks: &quot;do You, the same Lord and King Who loves mankind, Who has granted to us to clothe ourselves in the garment of snowy whiteness, by water and by Spirit: send down on us Your blessing, and through the partaking of this water, through sprinkling with it, wash away the defilement of passions.&quot;<br />
<br />
These services and prayers illustrate one necessary aspect of our relationship with creation: prayer for the well-being and sanctification of the world. It is our role as mediators between creation and God to ask for God's action in behalf of the world which &quot;not of its own will&quot; has been subjected to corruption. (Archimandrite Vasileios, &quot;Monasticism and Ecology&quot;, cf. Romans 8:20).<br />
<br />
God's action in creation and creation's role in our journey towards God culminate in the gifts of bread and wine which are brought forth to be consecrated to become the Holy Body and Blood of Christ. In the [[Eucharist]], man, as the priest of creation, offers creation back to the Creator and then receives it back sanctified and transformed into the very God to Whom it was offered. As Orthodox we believe that the Eucharist sanctifies the whole creation. As Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis has said, in the Eucharist we embrace in prayer the whole creation and no longer seek our salvation apart from the world.<br />
<br />
In practical terms, we need to remember that the environmental problem is directly related to other ethical issues. While there are several actions which have a direct effect on the environmental problem (e.g., recycling, re-use of materials such as plastic bags), the greater issue of the environment encompasses many facets of life.<br />
<br />
The main cause of the environmental problem is the increase in the consumption of goods in Western society over the last two centuries, without a corresponding concern for the disposal of resulting waste and the care and renewal of the natural raw materials needed to create the goods. For a true solution to the environmental crisis, both sides of this main cause need to be addressed. On the one hand, the Church needs to support efforts which are aimed at finding better waste-management system, more efficient technologies and at the replenishment of natural resources (e.g, reforestation efforts). In this spirit, Anestes Keselopoulos states: &quot;The slogan of a return to some pre-scientific civilization is today not merely a utopia, but may be a disaster for humanity. When man loses his ability to overcome nature, he does not attain to a true relationship with nature, nor does he preserve its purpose; he simply achieves a vegetative' state. This word does not denote man's return to nature, but his identification with nature in the realm of decay and death.&quot; (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian,&quot; p.60-61).<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the biggest contribution of the Church is her understanding of the need for an ascetic component to every person's life. In terms of material goods, the Church has never embraced the slogan that &quot;more is better.&quot; While not dismissing material possessions, she has always stressed that the true treasure is spiritual in nature. Thus, another responsibility of man in relation to creation is the implementation of this understanding into daily life. For the Church as a body, the responsibility translates inot educating the world about the true value of possessions as a part of her ministry to God's creation.<br />
<br />
The report &quot;Orthodox Perspectives on Creation&quot; states that &quot;the contemporary world must repent for the abuses which we have imposed upon the natural world. In this context, we need to remember the Orthodox concept of repentance (metanoia), which implies a complete change of heart. We need, therefore, not only to acknowledge our past mistakes, but to take action first to stop further abuses, and then, wherever possible, to revert the damage already done. As Fr. Stanley Harakas states in &quot;The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues:&quot; &quot;[h]umanity must come to see itself as intimately related to the non-human creation, to see itself as one with it in deep and profound community with it.&quot; (Harakas, ''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', &quot;In Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.79)<br />
<br />
We started this look at an Orthodox perspective on environmental ethics by looking at the accusation that Christianity bears a great share of the responsibility for the current environmental problem. However, we have seen that the sanctification of creation is part and parcel of the mission of Christianity. Our attitude towards creation is well summarized by St. [[John of Damascus]] &quot;I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake, who willed to take His abode in matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God... [but] because God has filled it with His grace and power.&quot; (On the Divine Images 1.16) <br />
<br />
==Articles on Environmental Issues==<br />
*[[Global Warming]]<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*''The Church, the Liturgy, and the Soul of Man : the Mystagogia of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by St. Maximus the Confessor, (St. Bede's Publications 1982)<br />
*''Cosmic Man: The Divine Presence : An Analysis of the Place and Role of the Human Race in the Cosmos, in Relation to God and the Historical World, in the Thought of St. Gregory of Nyssa (ca. 330 to ca. 395 A.D.)'', by Paulos Gregorios (Paragon House, 1988) (ISBN 0913757918)<br />
*''Ecology and monasticism'' by Archimadrite Vasileios of Stavronikita (Alexander Press 1996) (ISBN 1896800025)<br />
*''The Human Presence : An Orthodox View of Nature'', by Paulos Gregorios (WCC, 1978) (ISBN 2825405752)<br />
*''Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Insights from Orthodox'', Gennadios Limouris, Ed.(WCC Publications, 1990) (ISBN 2825409790)<br />
*''Man and the Cosmos : the Vision of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by Lars Thunberg (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press 1985) (ISBN 0881410195)<br />
*''Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian'', by Anestes Keselopoulos (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001) (ISBN 088141221X)<br />
*''On the Divine Images'', by St. John of Damascus (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1980) (ISBN 0913836621)<br />
*''Vespers for the Protection of the Environment'', by Monk Gerasimos of Little St. Anne (Narthex Press 2001) <br />
<br />
<br />
==Other helpful articles==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/miscellaneous.htm#environment Articles on the Environment] from the [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org Orthodox Research Institute] <br />
<br />
*[http://www.ec-patr.gr/docdisplay.php?lang=en&amp;cat=10 Ecological Activities of the Ecumenical Patriarchate] from the [http://www.ec-patr.gr/default.php?lang=en Official Ecumenical Patriarchate Website]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Environmental_ethicsEnvironmental ethics2007-03-02T18:00:35Z<p>Vandrona: typo, more wikification (final run through for me)</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Environmental ethics''' is the part of environmental philosophy which considers the ethical relationship between human beings and the natural environment, according to the Wikipedia definition (28 February 2007). This article will attempt to describe environmental ethics from the perspective of Orthodox theology, by exploring patristic and contemporary thought together with [[Scripture|scriptural] and liturgical evidence regarding a theology of creation. We begin by examining the place of material creation within the whole of created order, continue with theological consideration regarding the relationship between man and material creation, and conclude with some practical aspects of this relationship.<br />
<br />
==The Place of Material Creation in the Created Order==<br />
<br />
Christianity is often blamed for the environmental problems that the world is facing today. The accusation hinges on a particular understanding of [[Genesis]] 1:26 and 1:28:<br />
<br />
:''Then [[God]] said, &quot;Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. [...] God blessed them and said to them, &quot;Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.&quot; <br />
<br />
In one interpretation, the two verses above are understood to say that man has been given power over the earth to modify it according to his will. Some support for this world view can be gathered from writings of some [[Church Fathers]]. [[Origen]] in the East and St. [[Augustine of Hippo]] in the West each held the view that the material world would not be a part of the Kingdom of God. For St. Augustine, this meant that in the Kingdom, only human souls would be present. In contrast to the eternal soul, a temporary material creation is diminished in importance, resulting in an anthropocentric relationship between man and nature. This approach has also, at times, been predominant in Orthodox countries. Today, as we shall shortly see, Orthodox theologians are recovering the fullness of their theology, recognizing the presence of God in the whole of creation, and outlining the responsibilities we have towards that creation.<br />
<br />
The understanding of material creation as illustrated above is, at the very least, incomplete. Several Fathers, including Methodios of Olympus and St. [[Maximus the Confessor]], affirmed the value of creation and the cosmological dimension of the Kingdom of God. Anestes Keselopoulos, in his study on St. [[Symeon the New Theologian]], makes a powerful statement about the participation of nature in the Kingdom: &quot;Belief in the ultimate transfiguration and renewal of the world offers a real possibility for extending the theology of holy relics to the rest of creation. At the Second Coming, [...] the whole of material creation will be renewed as well. Material objects that surround the saints participate in sanctification. (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a study of St. Symeon the New Theologian&quot;).<br />
<br />
[[Psalm]] 104, read at every [[Vespers]] service, speaks of God's continued work in creation: <br />
<br />
:''&quot;You are clothed with honour and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent, you set the beams of your chambers on the waters, you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the wind, you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. You cause the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for people to use, to bring forth food from the earth, and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine, and bread to strengthen the human heart. The trees of the Lord are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.&quot;<br />
<br />
Scriptural, patristic, and liturgical evidence also provide a much richer picture of the role of material creation. This role includes praise of the Creator and joy at His work: &quot;Let heaven and earth praise Him, the seas and all that move in them&quot; (Ps. 69:34), &quot;The heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones&quot; (Ps. 89:5), &quot;Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad&quot; (Resurrectional [[apolytikion]], tone Pl. 1), &quot;let all creation bless and extol the Lord and let it exalt Him supremely to the ages&quot; (Eirmos of the eighth ode of the [[Canon_%28hymn%29|katavasiae]] for [[Christmas]]). [[Archimandrite]] Vasileios in &quot;Ecology and [[Monasticism]]&quot; states that the [[Pascha|Paschal]] hymns represent reality for the Orthodox: &quot;all the trees of the forest are rejoicing today; their nature has been sanctified because the Body of Christ was stretched upon a tree.&quot; <br />
<br />
Material creation also helps provide the means by which God interacts with, sanctifies and heals the world. [[Old Testament]] examples include the snake made by [[Moses]] (Numbers 21:8-9) and Balaam's donkey (Numbers 22:21-30) while some relevant [[New Testament]] passages are the stirring of the waters at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-5), [[Jesus]]' baptism (Matthew 3:13-17), and St. [[Apostle_James_the_Just|James]]' exhortation that the elders anoint those who are ill with oil to aid in their healing (James 5:14). The hymnography of the Church also portrays creation as a co-worker with God: &quot;the earth offers a cave to Him Whom no man can approach&quot; (Christmas kontakion).<br />
<br />
Thus, we see that the Orthodox tradition affirms that creation has value in itself, by virtue of its being created by God, praising God, and working together with God. In this context the Orthodox tradition regarding the relationship between man and nature falls mainly along two related and somewhat overlapping lines of thought. The first bases this relationship on the idea of man as a microcosm, while the second identifies man as the 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
==The Relationship between Man and Material Creation==<br />
===Man as a microcosm===<br />
<br />
The idea of man as a microcosm is most commonly associated with St. Maximus the Confessor. In his Mystagogia he speaks of an indissoluble relationship and unity between man and world: &quot;[St. Paul] put forward another suggestion, along the lines of the same imagery, that the whole world of visible and invisible things can be thought of as a man; and man, made up of body and soul, as a world&quot; (Chapter 7). Lars Thunberg, in his &quot;Man and the Cosmos&quot; relates St. Maximus' understanding of man as a microcosm by constitution and for the purpose of mediation. Being both material and spiritual, all things in the world are reflected in man, who then has the vocation to bring together mortal and immortal creatures, rational and non-rational beings. However, St. Maximus does not view this vocation of man in separation from God. Rather, he states that it is Christ who achieved this unity. Again Thunberg, analyzing the Ambigua, says that man needs to leave the sphere of creation behind and be united with God beyond his own nature. Thus, man's mission in relation to creation can only be fulfilled in and through Christ: &quot;Man created in the image of God is thus, according to Maximus, a key to understanding creation not only in order that he may understand it as it is, but also that by actively understanding it in his process of divinization he may elevate it to the supreme level of its full soteriological comprehension (Ambigua 10).&quot; (Thunberg, &quot;Man and the Cosmos, p.76).<br />
<br />
St. [[Gregory of Nyssa]] also uses the image of man and microcosm, though his use of the expression is rather less uniform than for St. Maximus. In his conception, the parallelism seems to be limited to a common praise of God&quot;: as the cosmos continuously lifts up a hymn of praise to God, so it is the duty of man to engage in continual psalmody and hymnody.&quot; Metr. Paulos Gregorios postulates that St. Gregory's reservation regarding a more in-depth parallelism stemmed from a concern that man's high standing within creation not be attributed to his similarity to the universe (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man&quot;). However, St. Gregory also views man as a mediator, between creation and God, whose mediation is made possible by the incarnation: &quot;in Christ, Man, and through Man, the whole creation, directly and without intermediaries, participates in the creative energies of God Himself&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man, p.103).<br />
<br />
Fr. Stanley Harakas summarizes the Orthodox position thus far: &quot;[t]he creation exists for the use of humanity; but humanity exists as a microcosm to sanctify creation and to draw it into the fullness of the life of the kingdom of God, to bring it into communion with its maker.&quot; (''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.73) <br />
<br />
While both St. Maximus and St. Gregory note that the mediation of man is directly related to Christ's incarnation. the details of that mediation are filled in by modern day theologians.<br />
<br />
===Man as Priest of Creation===<br />
<br />
The Genesis passage which started this article is open to other interpretations. One such interpretation, which gives man a certain responsibility towards the environment, presents the commission which was given to man as a stewardship. K.M. George in his essay &quot;Towards a Eucharistic Ecology&quot; points out that good stewardship, in the sense of the Greek 'oikonomos:'—manager or administrator of a house,—requires trustworthiness, dependability, and wisdom. He goes on to add: &quot;[w]e offer the creation as a thank-offering to God in liturgy&quot; (George, ''Towards a Eucharistic Theology'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrily of Creation&quot;, p.46). This statement contains within it the seed for the idea of that several contemporary theologians, among them [[Vigen Guroian]], Metr. Paulos Gregorios, and Metr. [[John_%28Zizioulas%29_of_Pergamon]], consider as the most important in defining man's relationship to creation: man as 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
Metr. Paulos Gregorios of the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East and one of the most ardent advocates of Christian ecology wrote, &quot;Nature, man, and God are not three disjunct realities on the stage with a space-interval between their respective boundaries. [...] Christ has become part of creation, and in his created body he lifted up the creation to God, and humankind must participate in this eternal priesthood of Christ&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;The Human Presence&quot;). Metr. John Zizioulas adds: &quot;The priest is the one who takes in his hands the world to refer it to God and who, in return brings God's blessing to what he refers to God. Through this act creation is brought into communion with God himself. [...] This role of the human being as the priest of creation, is absolutely necessary for creation itself, because without this reference of creation to God the whole created universe will die.&quot; He goes on to argue that ethics, as commonly understood, cannot provide a solution for the environmental problem; this is the place of the Church. Specifically, the metropolitan mentions fasting, respect for the material world and acknowledgement (within the Liturgy) that creation belongs to God as specific means by which the Church can effect change (Zizioulas, ''Man the Priest of Creation: A Response to the Ecological Problem,'' in &quot;Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World&quot;). <br />
<br />
The exercise of this priesthood encompasses both our lives within the church temple (the Liturgy) and outside of it (the liturgy before/after the liturgy).<br />
<br />
==Man and Material Creation: Practical Aspects==<br />
<br />
Within the liturgical context, the Church provides prayers for the blessing of material goods: homes, crops, vehicles. There are prayers asking for rain and for deliverance from earthquakes and other calamities. We see the presence of God everywhere in creation and we ask for His help in every endeavour. Partially in acknowledgment of that fact and partially in response to the ecological crisis, [[Monk]] Gerasimos of the Skete of Saint Anne has composed a Vespers for the preservation of creation. Even earlier, in 1934, [[Metropolitan]] Tryphon Turkestanov had composed an [[Akathist]] in Praise of God's Creation.<br />
<br />
Additionally, the prayers of the Lesser Blessing of the Waters include the following petitions:<br />
<br />
* That this water might be hallowed by the might, and operation, and descent of the [[Holy Spirit]]; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may descend upon these waters the cleansing operation of the supersubstantial [[Trinity]]; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That this water may be to the healing of souls and bodies, and to the banishment of every hostile power; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may be sent down upon it the [[Grace]] of Redemption, the blessing of the Jordan; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
In the prayer of sanctification of the same service, the priest asks: &quot;do You, the same Lord and King Who loves mankind, Who has granted to us to clothe ourselves in the garment of snowy whiteness, by water and by Spirit: send down on us Your blessing, and through the partaking of this water, through sprinkling with it, wash away the defilement of passions.&quot;<br />
<br />
These services and prayers illustrate one necessary aspect of our relationship with creation: prayer for the well-being and sanctification of the world. It is our role as mediators between creation and God to ask for God's action in behalf of the world which &quot;not of its own will&quot; has been subjected to corruption. (Archimandrite Vasileios, &quot;Monasticism and Ecology&quot;, cf. Romans 8:20).<br />
<br />
God's action in creation and creation's role in our journey towards God culminate in the gifts of bread and wine which are brought forth to be consecrated to become the Holy Body and Blood of Christ. In the [[Eucharist]], man, as the priest of creation, offers creation back to the Creator and then receives it back sanctified and transformed into the very God to Whom it was offered. As Orthodox we believe that the Eucharist sanctifies the whole creation. As Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis has said, in the Eucharist we embrace in prayer the whole creation and no longer seek our salvation apart from the world.<br />
<br />
In practical terms, we need to remember that the environmental problem is directly related to other ethical issues. While there are several actions which have a direct effect on the environmental problem (e.g., recycling, re-use of materials such as plastic bags), the greater issue of the environment encompasses many facets of life.<br />
<br />
The main cause of the environmental problem is the increase in the consumption of goods in Western society over the last two centuries, without a corresponding concern for the disposal of resulting waste and the care and renewal of the natural raw materials needed to create the goods. For a true solution to the environmental crisis, both sides of this main cause need to be addressed. On the one hand, the Church needs to support efforts which are aimed at finding better waste-management system, more efficient technologies and at the replenishment of natural resources (e.g, reforestation efforts). In this spirit, Anestes Keselopoulos states: &quot;The slogan of a return to some pre-scientific civilization is today not merely a utopia, but may be a disaster for humanity. When man loses his ability to overcome nature, he does not attain to a true relationship with nature, nor does he preserve its purpose; he simply achieves a vegetative' state. This word does not denote man's return to nature, but his identification with nature in the realm of decay and death.&quot; (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian,&quot; p.60-61).<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the biggest contribution of the Church is her understanding of the need for an ascetic component to every person's life. In terms of material goods, the Church has never embraced the slogan that &quot;more is better.&quot; While not dismissing material possessions, she has always stressed that the true treasure is spiritual in nature. Thus, another responsibility of man in relation to creation is the implementation of this understanding into daily life. For the Church as a body, the responsibility translates inot educating the world about the true value of possessions as a part of her ministry to God's creation.<br />
<br />
The report &quot;Orthodox Perspectives on Creation&quot; states that &quot;the contemporary world must repent for the abuses which we have imposed upon the natural world. In this context, we need to remember the Orthodox concept of repentance (metanoia), which implies a complete change of heart. We need, therefore, not only to acknowledge our past mistakes, but to take action first to stop further abuses, and then, wherever possible, to revert the damage already done. As Fr. Stanley Harakas states in &quot;The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues:&quot; &quot;[h]umanity must come to see itself as intimately related to the non-human creation, to see itself as one with it in deep and profound community with it.&quot; (Harakas, ''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', &quot;In Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.79)<br />
<br />
We started this look at an Orthodox perspective on environmental ethics by looking at the accusation that Christianity bears a great share of the responsibility for the current environmental problem. However, we have seen that the sanctification of creation is part and parcel of the mission of Christianity. Our attitude towards creation is well summarized by St. [[John of Damascus]] &quot;I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake, who willed to take His abode in matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God... [but] because God has filled it with His grace and power.&quot; (On the Divine Images 1.16) <br />
<br />
==Articles on Environmental Issues==<br />
*[[Global Warming]]<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*''The Church, the Liturgy, and the Soul of Man : the Mystagogia of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by St. Maximus the Confessor, (St. Bede's Publications 1982)<br />
*''Cosmic Man: The Divine Presence : An Analysis of the Place and Role of the Human Race in the Cosmos, in Relation to God and the Historical World, in the Thought of St. Gregory of Nyssa (ca. 330 to ca. 395 A.D.)'', by Paulos Gregorios (Paragon House, 1988) (ISBN 0913757918)<br />
*''Ecology and monasticism'' by Archimadrite Vasileios of Stavronikita (Alexander Press 1996) (ISBN 1896800025)<br />
*''The Human Presence : An Orthodox View of Nature'', by Paulos Gregorios (WCC, 1978) (ISBN 2825405752)<br />
*''Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Insights from Orthodox'', Gennadios Limouris, Ed.(WCC Publications, 1990) (ISBN 2825409790)<br />
*''Man and the Cosmos : the Vision of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by Lars Thunberg (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press 1985) (ISBN 0881410195)<br />
*''Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian'', by Anestes Keselopoulos (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001) (ISBN 088141221X)<br />
*''On the Divine Images'', by St. John of Damascus (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1980) (ISBN 0913836621)<br />
*''Vespers for the Protection of the Environment'', by Monk Gerasimos of Little St. Anne (Narthex Press 2001) <br />
<br />
<br />
==Other helpful articles==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/miscellaneous.htm#environment Articles on the Environment] from the [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org Orthodox Research Institute] <br />
<br />
*[http://www.ec-patr.gr/docdisplay.php?lang=en&amp;cat=10 Ecological Activities of the Ecumenical Patriarchate] from the [http://www.ec-patr.gr/default.php?lang=en Official Ecumenical Patriarchate Website]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Environmental_ethicsEnvironmental ethics2007-02-28T19:22:57Z<p>Vandrona: done for now. more wikifying needed</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Environmental ethics''' is the part of environmental philosophy which considers the ethical relationship between human beings and the natural environment, according to the Wikipedia definition (28 February 2007). This article will attempt to describe environmental ethics from the perspective of Orthodox theology, by exploring patristic and contemporary thought together with scriptural and liturgical evidence regarding a theology of creation. We begin by examining the place of material creation within the whole of created order, continue with theological consideration regarding the relationship between man and material creation, and conclude with some practical aspects of this relationship.<br />
<br />
==The Place of Material Creation in the Created Order==<br />
<br />
Christianity is often blamed for the environmental problems that the world is facing today. The accusation hinges on a particular understanding of [[Genesis]] 1:26 and 1:28:<br />
<br />
:''Then God said, &quot;Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. [...] God blessed them and said to them, &quot;Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.&quot; <br />
<br />
In one interpretation, the two verses above are understood to say that man has been given power over the earth to modify it according to his will. Some support for this world view can be gathered from writings of some [[Church Fathers]]. [[Origen]] in the East and St. [[Augustine of Hippo]] in the West each held the view that the material world would not be a part of the Kingdom of God. For St. Augustine, this meant that in the Kingdom, only human souls would be present. In contrast to the eternal soul, a temporary material creation is diminished in importance, resulting in an anthropocentric relationship between man and nature. This approach has also, at times, been predominant in Orthodox countries. Today, as we shall shortly see, Orthodox theologians are recovering the fullness of their theology, recognizing the presence of God in the whole of creation, and outlining the responsibilities we have towards that creation.<br />
<br />
The understanding of material creation as illustrated above is, at the very least, incomplete. Several Fathers, including Methodios of Olympus and St. [[Maximus the Confessor]], affirmed the value of creation and the cosmological dimension of the Kingdom of God. Anestes Keselopoulos, in his study on St. [[Symeon the New Theologian]], makes a powerful statement about the participation of nature in the Kingdom: &quot;Belief in the ultimate transfiguration and renewal of the world offers a real possibility for extending the theology of holy relics to the rest of creation. At the Second Coming, [...] the whole of material creation will be renewed as well. Material objects that surround the saints participate in sanctification. (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a study of St. Symeon the New Theologian&quot;).<br />
<br />
[[Psalm]] 104, read at every [[Vespers]] service, speaks of God's continued work in creation: <br />
<br />
:''&quot;You are clothed with honour and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent, you set the beams of your chambers on the waters, you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the wind, you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. You cause the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for people to use, to bring forth food from the earth, and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine, and bread to strengthen the human heart. The trees of the Lord are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.&quot;<br />
<br />
Scriptural, patristic, and liturgical evidence also provide a much richer picture of the role of material creation. This role includes praise of the Creator and joy at His work: &quot;Let heaven and earth praise Him, the seas and all that move in them&quot; (Ps. 69:34), &quot;The heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones&quot; (Ps. 89:5), &quot;Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad&quot; (Resurrectional apolytikion, tone Pl. 1), &quot;let all creation bless and extol the Lord and let it exalt Him supremely to the ages&quot; (Eirmos of the eighth ode of the katavasiae for Christmas). Archimandrite Vasileios in &quot;Ecology and Monasticism&quot; states that the Paschal hymns represent reality for the Orthodox: &quot;all the trees of the forest are rejoicing today; their nature has been sanctified because the Body of Christ was stretched upon a tree.&quot; <br />
<br />
Material creation also helps provide the means by which God interacts with, sanctifies and heals the world. Old Testament include the snake made by Moses (Numbers 21:8-9) and Balaam's donkey (Numbers 22:21-30) while some relevant New Testament passages are the stirring of the waters at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-5), Jesus' baptism (Matthew 3:13-17), and St. James' exhortation that the elders anoint those who are ill with oil to aid in their healing (James 5:14). The hymnography of the Church also portrays creation as a co-worker with God: &quot;the earth offers a cave to Him Whom no man can approach&quot; (Christmas kontakion).<br />
<br />
Thus, we see that the Orthodox tradition affirms that creation has value in itself, by virtue of its being created by God, praising God, and working together with God. In this context the Orthodox tradition regarding the relationship between man and nature falls mainly along two related and somewhat overlapping lines of thought. The first bases this relationship on the idea of man as a microcosm, while the second identifies man as the 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
==The Relationship between Man and Material Creation==<br />
===Man as a microcosm===<br />
<br />
The idea of man as a microcosm is most commonly associated with St. Maximus the Confessor. In his Mystagogia he speaks of an indissoluble relationship and unity between man and world: &quot;[St. Paul] put forward another suggestion, along the lines of the same imagery, that the whole world of visible and invisible things can be thought of as a man; and man, made up of body and soul, as a world&quot; (Chapter 7). Lars Thunberg, in his &quot;Man and the Cosmos&quot; relates St. Maximus' understanding of man as a microcosm by constitution and for the purpose of mediation. Being both material and spiritual, all things in the world are reflected in man, who then has the vocation to bring together mortal and immortal creatures, rational and non-rational beings. However, St. Maximus does not view this vocation of man in separation from God. Rather, he states that it is Christ who achieved this unity. Again Thunberg, analyzing the Ambigua, says that man needs to leave the sphere of creation behind and be united with God beyond his own nature. Thus, man's mission in relation to creation can only be fulfilled in and through Christ: &quot;Man created in the image of God is thus, according to Maximus, a key to understanding creation not only in order that he may understand it as it is, but also that by actively understanding it in his process of divinization he may elevate it to the supreme level of its full soteriological comprehension (Ambigua 10).&quot; (Thunberg, &quot;Man and the Cosmos, p.76).<br />
<br />
St. [[Gregory of Nyssa]] also uses the image of man and microcosm, though his use of the expression is rather less uniform than for St. Maximus. In his conception, the parallelism seems to be limited to a common praise of God&quot;: as the cosmos continuously lifts up a hymn of praise to God, so it is the duty of man to engage in continual psalmody and hymnody.&quot; Metr. Paulos Gregorios postulates that St. Gregory's reservation regarding a more in-depth parallelism stemmed from a concern that man's high standing within creation not be attributed to his similarity to the universe (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man&quot;). However, St. Gregory also views man as a mediator, between creation and God, whose mediation is made possible by the incarnation: &quot;in Christ, Man, and through Man, the whole creation, directly and without intermediaries, participates in the creative energies of God Himself&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man, p.103).<br />
<br />
Fr. Stanley Harakas summarizes the Orthodox position thus far: &quot;[t]he creation exists for the use of humanity; but humanity exists as a microcosm to sanctify creation and to draw it into the fullness of the life of the kingdom of God, to bring it into communion with its maker.&quot; (''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.73) <br />
<br />
While both St. Maximus and St. Gregory note that the mediation of man is directly related to Christ's incarnation. the details of that mediation are filled in by modern day theologians.<br />
<br />
===Man as Priest of Creation===<br />
<br />
The Genesis passage which started this article is open to other interpretations. One such interpretation, which gives man a certain responsibility towards the environment, presents the commission which was given to man as a stewardship. K.M. George in his essay &quot;Towards a Eucharistic Ecology&quot; points out that good stewardship, in the sense of the Greek 'oikonomos:'—manager or administrator of a house,—requires trustworthiness, dependability, and wisdom. He goes on to add: &quot;[w]e offer the creation as a thank-offering to God in liturgy&quot; (George, ''Towards a Eucharistic Theology'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrily of Creation&quot;, p.46). This statement contains within it the seed for the idea of that several contemporary theologians, among them [[Vigen Guroian]], Metr. Paulos Gregorios, and Metr. [[John_%28Zizioulas%29_of_Pergamon]], consider as the most important in defining man's relationship to creation: man as 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
Metr. Paulos Gregorios of the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East and one of the most ardent advocates of Christian ecology wrote, &quot;Nature, man, and God are not three disjunct realities on the stage with a space-interval between their respective boundaries. [...] Christ has become part of creation, and in his created body he lifted up the creation to God, and humankind must participate in this eternal priesthood of Christ&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;The Human Presence&quot;). Metr. John Zizioulas adds: &quot;The priest is the one who takes in his hands the world to refer it to God and who, in return brings God's blessing to what he refers to God. Through this act creation is brought into communion with God himself. [...] This role of the human being as the priest of creation, is absolutely necessary for creation itself, because without this reference of creation to God the whole created universe will die.&quot; He goes on to argue that ethics, as commonly understood, cannot provide a solution for the environmental problem; this is the place of the Church. Specifically, the metropolitan mentions fasting, respect for the material world and acknowledgement (within the Liturgy) that creation belongs to God as specific means by which the Church can effect change (Zizioulas, ''Man the Priest of Creation: A Response to the Ecological Problem,'' in &quot;Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World&quot;). <br />
<br />
The exercise of this priesthood encompasses both our lives within the church temple (the Liturgy) and outside of it (the liturgy before/after the liturgy).<br />
<br />
==Man and Material Creation: Practical Aspects==<br />
<br />
Within the liturgical context, the Church provides prayers for the blessing of material goods: homes, crops, vehicles. There are prayers asking for rain and for deliverance from earthquakes and other calamities. We see the presence of God everywhere in creation and we ask for His help in every endeavour. Partially in acknowledgment of that fact and partially in response to the ecological crisis, Monk Gerasimos of the Skete of Saint Anne has composed a Vespers for the preservation of creation. Even earlier, in 1934, Metropolitan Tryphon Turkestanov had composed an [[Akathist]] in Praise of God's Creation.<br />
<br />
Additionally, the prayers of the Lesser Blessing of the Waters include the following petitions:<br />
<br />
* That this water might be hallowed by the might, and operation, and descent of the Holy Spirit; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may descend upon these waters the cleansing operation of the supersubstantial Trinity; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That this water may be to the healing of souls and bodies, and to the banishment of every hostile power; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may be sent down upon it the Grace of Redemption, the blessing of the Jordan; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
In the prayer of sanctification of the same service, the priest asks: &quot;do You, the same Lord and King Who loves mankind, Who has granted to us to clothe ourselves in the garment of snowy whiteness, by water and by Spirit: send down on us Your blessing, and through the partaking of this water, through sprinkling with it, wash away the defilement of passions.&quot;<br />
<br />
These services and prayers illustrate one necessary aspect of our relationship with creation: prayer for the well-being and sanctification of the world. It is our role as mediators between creation and God to ask for God's action in behalf of the world which &quot;not of its own will&quot; has been subjected to corruption. (Archimandrite Vasileios, &quot;Monasticism and Ecology&quot;, cf. Romans 8:20).<br />
<br />
God's action in creation and creation's role in our journey towards God culminate in the gifts of bread and wine which are brought forth to be consecrated to become the Holy Body and Blood of Christ. In the [[Eucharist]], man, as the priest of creation, offers creation back to the Creator and then receives it back sanctified and transformed into the very God to Whom it was offered. As Orthodox we believe that the Eucharist sanctifies the whole creation. As Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis has said, in the Eucharist we embrace in prayer the whole creation and no longer seek our salvation apart from the world.<br />
<br />
In practical terms, we need to remember that the environmental problem is directly related to other ethical issues. While there are several actions which have a direct effect on the environmental problem (e.g., recycling, re-use of materials such as plastic bags), the greater issue of the environment encompasses many facets of life.<br />
<br />
The main cause of the environmental problem is the increase in the consumption of goods in Western society over the last two centuries, without a corresponding concern for the disposal of resulting waste and the care and renewal of the natural raw materials needed to create the goods. For a true solution to the environmental crisis, both sides of this main cause need to be addressed. On the one hand, the Church needs to support efforts which are aimed at finding better waste-management system, more efficient technologies and at the replenishment of natural resources (e.g, reforestation efforts). In this spirit, Anestes Keselopoulos states: &quot;The slogan of a return to some pre-scientific civilization is today not merely a utopia, but may be a disaster for humanity. When man loses his ability to overcome nature, he does not attain to a true relationship with nature, nor does he preserve its purpose; he simply achieves a vegetative' state. This word does not denote man's return to nature, but his identification with nature in the realm of decay and death.&quot; (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian,&quot; p.60-61).<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the biggest contribution of the Church is her understanding of the need for an ascetic component to every person's life. In terms of material goods, the Church has never embraced the slogan that &quot;more is better.&quot; While not dismissing material possessions, she has always stressed that the true treasure is spiritual in nature. Thus, another responsibility of man in relation to creation is the implementation of this understanding into daily life. For the Church as a body, the responsibility translates inot educating the world about the true value of possessions as a part of her ministry to God's creation.<br />
<br />
The report &quot;Orthodox Perspectives on Creation&quot; states that &quot;the contemporary world must repent for the abuses which we have imposed upon the natural world. In this context, we need to remember the Orthodox concept of repentance (metanoia), which implies a complete change of heart. We need, therefore, not only to acknowledge our past mistakes, but to take action first to stop further abuses, and then, wherever possible, to revert the damage already done. As Fr. Stanley Harakas states in &quot;The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues:&quot; &quot;[h]umanity must come to see itself as intimately related to the non-human creation, to see itself as one with it in deep and profound community with it.&quot; (Harakas, ''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', &quot;In Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.79)<br />
<br />
We started this look at an Orthodox perspective on environmental ethics by looking at the accusation that Christianity bears a great share of the responsibility for the current environmental problem. However, we have seen that the sanctification of creation is part and parcel of the mission of Christianity. Our attitude towards creation is well summarized by St. [[John of Damascus]] &quot;I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake, who willed to take His abode in matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God... [but] because God has filled it with His grace and power.&quot; (On the Divine Images 1.16) <br />
<br />
==Articles on Environmental Issues==<br />
*[[Global Warming]]<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*''The Church, the Liturgy, and the Soul of Man : the Mystagogia of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by St. Maximus the Confessor, (St. Bede's Publications 1982)<br />
*''Cosmic Man: The Divine Presence : An Analysis of the Place and Role of the Human Race in the Cosmos, in Relation to God and the Historical World, in the Thought of St. Gregory of Nyssa (ca. 330 to ca. 395 A.D.)'', by Paulos Gregorios (Paragon House, 1988) (ISBN 0913757918)<br />
*''Ecology and monasticism'' by Archimadrite Vasileios of Stavronikita (Alexander Press 1996) (ISBN 1896800025)<br />
*''The Human Presence : An Orthodox View of Nature'', by Paulos Gregorios (WCC, 1978) (ISBN 2825405752)<br />
*''Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Insights from Orthodox'', Gennadios Limouris, Ed.(WCC Publications, 1990) (ISBN 2825409790)<br />
*''Man and the Cosmos : the Vision of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by Lars Thunberg (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press 1985) (ISBN 0881410195)<br />
*''Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian'', by Anestes Keselopoulos (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001) (ISBN 088141221X)<br />
*''On the Divine Images'', by St. John of Damascus (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1980) (ISBN 0913836621)<br />
*''Vespers for the Protection of the Environment'', by Monk Gerasimos of Little St. Anne (Narthex Press 2001) <br />
<br />
<br />
==Other helpful articles==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/miscellaneous.htm#environment Articles on the Environment] from the [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org Orthodox Research Institute] <br />
<br />
*[http://www.ec-patr.gr/docdisplay.php?lang=en&amp;cat=10 Ecological Activities of the Ecumenical Patriarchate] from the [http://www.ec-patr.gr/default.php?lang=en Official Ecumenical Patriarchate Website]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Environmental_ethicsEnvironmental ethics2007-02-28T17:27:04Z<p>Vandrona: more still needs to be done...</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Environmental ethics''' is the part of environmental philosophy which considers the ethical relationship between human beings and the natural environment, according to the Wikipedia definition (28 February 2007). This article will attempt to describe environmental ethics from the perspective of Orthodox theology, by exploring patristic and contemporary thought together with scriptural and liturgical evidence regarding a theology of creation. We begin by examining the place of material creation within the whole of created order, continue with theological consideration regarding the relationship between man and material creation, and conclude with some practical aspects of this relationship.<br />
<br />
==The Place of Material Creation in the Created Order==<br />
<br />
Christianity is often blamed for the environmental problems that the world is facing today. The accusation hinges on a particular understanding of Genesis 1:26 and 1:28:<br />
<br />
:''Then God said, &quot;Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. [...] God blessed them and said to them, &quot;Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.&quot; <br />
<br />
In one interpretation, the two verses above are understood to say that man has been given power over the earth to modify it according to his will. Some support for this world view can be gathered from writings of some Church Fathers. Origen in the East and St. Augustine in the West each held the view that the material world would not be a part of the Kingdom of God. For St. Augustine, this meant that in the Kingdom, only human souls would be present. In contrast to the eternal soul, a temporary material creation is diminished in importance, resulting in an anthropocentric relationship between man and nature. This approach has also, at times, been predominant in Orthodox countries. Today, as we shall shortly see, Orthodox theologians are recovering the fullness of their theology, recognizing the presence of God in the whole of creation, and outlining the responsibilities we have towards that creation.<br />
<br />
The understanding of material creation as illustrated above is, at the very least, incomplete. Several Fathers, including Methodios of Olympus and St. Maximos the Confessor, affirmed the value of creation and the cosmological dimension of the Kingdom of God. Anestes Keselopoulos, in his study on St. Symeon the New Theologian, makes a powerful statement about the participation of nature in the Kingdom: &quot;Belief in the ultimate transfiguration and renewal of the world offers a real possibility for extending the theology of holy relics to the rest of creation. At the Second Coming, [...] the whole of material creation will be renewed as well. Material objects that surround the saints participate in sanctification. (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a study of St. Symeon the New Theologian&quot;).<br />
<br />
Psalm 104, read at every Vespers service, speaks of God's continued work in creation: <br />
<br />
:''&quot;You are clothed with honour and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent, you set the beams of your chambers on the waters, you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the wind, you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. You cause the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for people to use, to bring forth food from the earth, and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine, and bread to strengthen the human heart. The trees of the Lord are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.&quot;<br />
<br />
Scriptural, patristic, and liturgical evidence also provide a much richer picture of the role of material creation. This role includes praise of the Creator and joy at His work: &quot;Let heaven and earth praise Him, the seas and all that move in them&quot; (Ps. 69:34), &quot;The heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones&quot; (Ps. 89:5), &quot;Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad&quot; (Resurrectional apolytikion, tone Pl. 1), &quot;let all creation bless and extol the Lord and let it exalt Him supremely to the ages&quot; (Eirmos of the eighth ode of the katavasiae for Christmas). Archimandrite Vasileios in &quot;Ecology and Monasticism&quot; states that the Paschal hymns represent reality for the Orthodox: &quot;all the trees of the forest are rejoicing today; their nature has been sanctified because the Body of Christ was stretched upon a tree.&quot; <br />
<br />
Material creation also helps provide the means by which God interacts with, sanctifies and heals the world. Old Testament include the snake made by Moses (Numbers 21:8-9) and Balaam's donkey (Numbers 22:21-30) while some relevant New Testament passages are the stirring of the waters at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-5), Jesus' baptism (Matthew 3:13-17), and St. James' exhortation that the elders anoint those who are ill with oil to aid in their healing (James 5:14). The hymnography of the Church also portrays creation as a co-worker with God: &quot;the earth offers a cave to Him Whom no man can approach&quot; (Christmas kontakion).<br />
<br />
Thus, we see that the Orthodox tradition affirms that creation has value in itself, by virtue of its being created by God, praising God, and working together with God. In this context the Orthodox tradition regarding the relationship between man and nature falls mainly along two related and somewhat overlapping lines of thought. The first bases this relationship on the idea of man as a microcosm, while the second identifies man as the 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
==The Relationship between Man and Material Creation==<br />
===Man as a microcosm===<br />
<br />
The idea of man as a microcosm is most commonly associated with St. Maximos the Confessor. In his Mystagogia he speaks of an indissoluble relationship and unity between man and world: [St. Paul] put forward another suggestion, along the lines of the same imagery, that the whole world of visible and invisible things can be thought of as a man; and man, made up of body and soul, as a world&quot; (Chapter 7). Lars Thunberg, in his &quot;Man and the Cosmos&quot; relates St. Maximos' understanding of man as a microcosm by constitution and for the purpose of mediation. Being both material and spiritual, all things in the world are reflected in man, who then has the vocation to bring together mortal and immortal creatures, rational and non-rational beings. However, St. Maximos does not view this vocation of man in separation from God. Rather, he states that it is Christ who achieved this unity. Again Thunberg, analyzing the Ambigua, says that man needs to leave the sphere of creation behind and be united with God beyond his own nature. Thus, man's mission in relation to creation can only be fulfilled in and through Christ: &quot;Man created in the image of God is thus, according to Maximus, a key to understanding creation not only in order that he may understand it as it is, but also that by actively understanding it in his process of divinization he may elevate it to the supreme level of its full soteriological comprehension (Ambigua 10).&quot; (Thunberg, &quot;Man and the Cosmos, p.76).<br />
<br />
St. Gregory of Nyssa also uses the image of man and microcosm, though his use of the expression is rather less uniform than for St. Maximos. In his conception, the parallelism seems to be limited to a common praise of God&quot;: as the cosmos continuously lifts up a hymn of praise to God, so it is the duty of man to engage in continual psalmody and hymnody.&quot; Metr. Paulos Gregorios postulates that St. Gregory's reservation regarding a more in-depth parallelism stemmed from a concern that man's high standing within creation not be attributed to his similarity to the universe (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man&quot;). However, St. Gregory also views man as a mediator, between creation and God, whose mediation is made possible by the incarnation: &quot;in Christ, Man, and through Man, the whole creation, directly and without intermediaries, participates in the creative energies of God Himself&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man, p.103).<br />
<br />
Fr. Stanley Harakas summarizes the Orthodox position thus far: &quot;[t]he creation exists for the use of humanity; but humanity exists as a microcosm to sanctify creation and to draw it into the fullness of the life of the kingdom of God, to bring it into communion with its maker.&quot; (''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.73) <br />
<br />
While both St. Maximos and St. Gregory note that the mediation of man is directly related to Christ's incarnation. the details of that mediation are filled in by modern day theologians.<br />
<br />
===Man as Priest of Creation===<br />
<br />
The Genesis passage which started this article is open to other interpretations. One such interpretation, which gives man a certain responsibility towards the environment, presents the commission which was given to man as a stewardship. K.M. George in his essay &quot;Towards a Eucharistic Ecology&quot; points out that good stewardship, in the sense of the Greek 'oikonomos:'—manager or administrator of a house,—requires trustworthiness, dependability, and wisdom. He goes on to add: &quot;[w]e offer the creation as a thank-offering to God in liturgy&quot; (George, ''Towards a Eucharistic Theology'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrily of Creation&quot;, p.46). This statement contains within it the seed for the idea of that several contemporary theologians, among them Vigen Guroian, Metr. Paulos Gregorios, and Metr. John Zizioulas, consider as the most important in defining man's relationship to creation: man as 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
Metr. Paulos Gregorios of the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East and one of the most ardent advocates of Christian ecology wrote, &quot;Nature, man, and God are not three disjunct realities on the stage with a space-interval between their respective boundaries. [...] Christ has become part of creation, and in his created body he lifted up the creation to God, and humankind must participate in this eternal priesthood of Christ&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;The Human Presence&quot;). Metr. John Zizioulas adds: &quot;The priest is the one who takes in his hands the world to refer it to God and who, in return brings God's blessing to what he refers to God. Through this act creation is brought into communion with God himself. [...] This role of the human being as the priest of creation, is absolutely necessary for creation itself, because without this reference of creation to God the whole created universe will die.&quot; He goes on to argue that ethics, as commonly understood, cannot provide a solution for the environmental problem; this is the place of the Church. Specifically, the metropolitan mentions fasting, respect for the material world and acknowledgement (within the Liturgy) that creation belongs to God as specific means by which the Church can effect change (Zizioulas, ''Man the Priest of Creation: A Response to the Ecological Problem,'' in &quot;Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World&quot;). <br />
<br />
The exercise of this priesthood encompasses both our lives within the church temple (the Liturgy) and outside of it (the liturgy before/after the liturgy).<br />
<br />
==Man and Material Creation: Practical Aspects==<br />
<br />
Within the liturgical context, the Church provides prayers for the blessing of material goods: homes, crops, vehicles. There are prayers asking for rain and for deliverance from earthquakes and other calamities. We see the presence of God everywhere in creation and we ask for His help in every endeavour. Partially in acknowledgment of that fact and partially in response to the ecological crisis, Monk Gerasimos of the Skete of Saint Anne has composed a Vespers for the preservation of creation. Even earlier, in 1934, Metropolitan Tryphon Turkestanov had composed an Akathist in Praise of God's Creation.<br />
<br />
Additionally, the prayers of the Lesser Blessing of the Waters include the following petitions:<br />
<br />
* That this water might be hallowed by the might, and operation, and descent of the Holy Spirit; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may descend upon these waters the cleansing operation of the supersubstantial Trinity; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That this water may be to the healing of souls and bodies, and to the banishment of every hostile power; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may be sent down upon it the Grace of Redemption, the blessing of the Jordan; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
In the prayer of sanctification of the same service, the priest asks: &quot;do You, the same Lord and King Who loves mankind, Who has granted to us to clothe ourselves in the garment of snowy whiteness, by water and by Spirit: send down on us Your blessing, and through the partaking of this water, through sprinkling with it, wash away the defilement of passions.&quot;<br />
<br />
These services and prayers illustrate one necessary aspect of our relationship with creation: prayer for the well-being and sanctification of the world. It is our role as mediators between creation and God to ask for God's action in behalf of the world which &quot;not of its own will&quot; has been subjected to corruption. (Archimandrite Vasileios, &quot;Monasticism and Ecology&quot;, cf. Rom 8:20).<br />
<br />
God's action in creation and creation's role in our journey towards God culminate in the gifts of bread and wine which are brought forth to be consecrated to become the Holy Body and Blood of Christ. In the Eucharist, man, as the priest of creation, offers creation back to the Creator and then receives it back sanctified and transformed into the very God to Whom it was offered. As Orthodox we believe that the Eucharist sanctifies the whole creation. As Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis has said, in the Eucharist we embrace in prayer the whole creation and no longer seek our salvation apart from the world.<br />
<br />
In practical terms, we need to remember that the environmental problem is directly related to other ethical issues. While there are several actions which have a direct effect on the environmental problem (e.g., recycling, re-use of materials such as plastic bags), the greater issue of the environment encompasses many facets of life.<br />
<br />
The main cause of the environmental problem is the increase in the consumption of goods in Western society over the last two centuries, without a corresponding concern for the disposal of resulting waste and the care and renewal of the natural raw materials needed to create the goods. For a true solution to the environmental crisis, both sides of this main cause need to be addressed. On the one hand, the Church needs to support efforts which are aimed at finding better waste-management system, more efficient technologies and at the replenishment of natural resources (e.g, reforestation efforts). In this spirit, Anestes Keselopoulos states: &quot;The slogan of a return to some pre-scientific civilization is today not merely a utopia, but may be a disaster for humanity. When man loses his ability to overcome nature, he does not attain to a true relationship with nature, nor does he preserve its purpose; he simply achieves a vegetative' state. This word does not denote man's return to nature, but his identification with nature in the realm of decay and death.&quot; (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian,&quot; p.60-61).<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the biggest contribution of the Church is her understanding of the need for an ascetic component to every person's life. In terms of material goods, the Church has never embraced the slogan that &quot;more is better.&quot; While not dismissing material possessions, she has always stressed that the true treasure is spiritual in nature. Thus, another responsibility of man in relation to creation is the implementation of this understanding into daily life. For the Church as a body, the responsibility translates inot educating the world about the true value of possessions as a part of her ministry to God's creation.<br />
<br />
The report &quot;Orthodox Perspectives on Creation&quot; states that &quot;the contemporary world must repent for the abuses which we have imposed upon the natural world. In this context, we need to remember the Orthodox concept of repentance (metanoia), which implies a complete change of heart. We need, therefore, not only to acknowledge our past mistakes, but to take action first to stop further abuses, and then, wherever possible, to revert the damage already done. As Fr. Stanley Harakas states in &quot;The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues:&quot; &quot;[h]umanity must come to see itself as intimately related to the non-human creation, to see itself as one with it in deep and profound community with it.&quot; (Harakas, ''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', &quot;In Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.79)<br />
<br />
We started this look at an Orthodox perspective on environmental ethics by looking at the accusation that Christianity bears a great share of the responsibility for the current environmental problem. However, we have seen that the sanctification of creation is part and parcel of the mission of Christianity. Our attitude towards creation is well summarized by St. John of Damascus &quot;I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake, who willed to take His abode in matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God... [but] because God has filled it with His grace and power.&quot; (On the Divine Images 1.16) <br />
<br />
==Articles on Environmental Issues==<br />
*[[Global Warming]]<br />
<br />
==Books==<br />
*''The church, the liturgy, and the soul of man : the Mystagogia of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by St. Maximos the Confessor, (St. Bede's Publications 1982)<br />
*''Ecology and monasticism'' by Archimadrite Vasileios of Stavronikita (Alexander Press 1996) (ISBN 1896800025)<br />
*''Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Insights from Orthodox'', Gennadios Limouris, Ed.(WCC Publications, 1990) (ISBN 2825409790)<br />
*''Man and the cosmos : the vision of St. Maximus the Confessor'', by Lars Thunberg (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press 1985) (ISBN 0881410195)<br />
*''Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian'', by Anestes Keselopoulos (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001) (ISBN 088141221X)<br />
*''On the Divine Images'', by St. John of Damascus (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1980) (ISBN 0913836621)<br />
*''Vespers for the Protection of the Environment'', by Monk Gerasimos of Little St. Anne (Narthex Press 2001) <br />
<br />
<br />
==Other helpful articles==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/miscellaneous.htm#environment Articles on the Environment] from the [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org Orthodox Research Institute] <br />
<br />
*[http://www.ec-patr.gr/docdisplay.php?lang=en&amp;cat=10 Ecological Activities of the Ecumenical Patriarchate] from the [http://www.ec-patr.gr/default.php?lang=en Official Ecumenical Patriarchate Website]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Environmental_ethicsEnvironmental ethics2007-02-28T17:07:19Z<p>Vandrona: still wikifying; saving changes thus far</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Environmental ethics''' is the part of environmental philosophy which considers the ethical relationship between human beings and the natural environment, according to the Wikipedia definition (28 February 2007). This article will attempt to describe environmental ethics from the perspective of Orthodox theology, by exploring patristic and contemporary thought together with scriptural and liturgical evidence regarding a theology of creation. We begin by examining the place of material creation within the whole of created order, continue with theological consideration regarding the relationship between man and material creation, and conclude with some practical aspects of this relationship.<br />
<br />
==The Place of Material Creation in the Created Order==<br />
<br />
Christianity is often blamed for the environmental problems that the world is facing today. The accusation hinges on a particular understanding of Genesis 1:26 and 1:28:<br />
<br />
Then God said, &quot;Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. [...] God blessed them and said to them, &quot;Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.&quot; <br />
<br />
In one interpretation, the two verses above are understood to say that man has been given power over the earth to modify it according to his will. Some support for this world view can be gathered from writings of some Church Fathers. Origen in the East and St. Augustine in the West each held the view that the material world would not be a part of the Kingdom of God. For St. Augustine, this meant that in the Kingdom, only human souls would be present. In contrast to the eternal soul, a temporary material creation is diminished in importance, resulting in an anthropocentric relationship between man and nature. This approach has also, at times, been predominant in Orthodox countries. Today, as we shall shortly see, Orthodox theologians are recovering the fullness of their theology, recognizing the presence of God in the whole of creation, and outlining the responsibilities we have towards that creation.<br />
<br />
The understanding of material creation as illustrated above is, at the very least, incomplete. Several Fathers, including Methodios of Olympus and St. Maximos the Confessor, affirmed the value of creation and the cosmological dimension of the Kingdom of God. Anestis Keselopoulos, in his study on St. Symeon the New Theologian, makes a powerful statement about the participation of nature in the Kingdom: &quot;Belief in the ultimate transfiguration and renewal of the world offers a real possibility for extending the theology of holy relics to the rest of creation. At the Second Coming, [...] the whole of material creation will be renewed as well. Material objects that surround the saints participate in sanctification. (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a study of St. Symeon the New Theologian&quot;).<br />
<br />
Psalm 104, read at every Vespers service, speaks of God's continued work in creation: <br />
<br />
&quot;You are clothed with honour and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent, you set the beams of your chambers on the waters, you make the clouds your chariot, you ride on the wings of the wind, you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. You cause the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for people to use, to bring forth food from the earth, and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine, and bread to strengthen the human heart. The trees of the Lord are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.&quot;<br />
<br />
Scriptural, patristic, and liturgical evidence also provide a much richer picture of the role of material creation. This role includes praise of the Creator and joy at His work: &quot;Let heaven and earth praise Him, the seas and all that move in them&quot; (Ps. 69:34), &quot;The heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones&quot; (Ps. 89:5), &quot;Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad&quot; (Resurrectional apolytikion, tone Pl. 1), &quot;let all creation bless and extol the Lord and let it exalt Him supremely to the ages&quot; (Eirmos of the eighth ode of the katavasiae for Christmas). Archimandrite Vasileios in &quot;Ecology and Monasticism&quot; states that the Paschal hymns represent reality for the Orthodox: &quot;all the trees of the forest are rejoicing today; their nature has been sanctified because the Body of Christ was stretched upon a tree.&quot; <br />
<br />
Material creation also helps provide the means by which God interacts with, sanctifies and heals the world. Old Testament include the snake made by Moses (Numbers 21:8-9) and Balaam's donkey (Numbers 22:21-30) while some relevant New Testament passages are the stirring of the waters at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-5), Jesus' baptism (Matthew 3:13-17), and St. James' exhortation that the elders anoint those who are ill with oil to aid in their healing (James 5:14). The hymnography of the Church also portrays creation as a co-worker with God: &quot;the earth offers a cave to Him Whom no man can approach&quot; (Christmas kontakion).<br />
<br />
Thus, we see that the Orthodox tradition affirms that creation has value in itself, by virtue of its being created by God, praising God, and working together with God. In this context the Orthodox tradition regarding the relationship between man and nature falls mainly along two related and somewhat overlapping lines of thought. The first bases this relationship on the idea of man as a microcosm, while the second identifies man as the 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
==The Relationship between Man and Material Creation==<br />
===Man as a microcosm===<br />
<br />
The idea of man as a microcosm is most commonly associated with St. Maximos the Confessor. In his Mystagogia he speaks of an indissoluble relationship and unity between man and world: [St. Paul] put forward another suggestion, along the lines of the same imagery, that the whole world of visible and invisible things can be thought of as a man; and man, made up of body and soul, as a world&quot; (Chapter 7). Lars Thunberg, in his &quot;Man and the Cosmos&quot; relates St. Maximos' understanding of man as a microcosm by constitution and for the purpose of mediation. Being both material and spiritual, all things in the world are reflected in man, who then has the vocation to bring together mortal and immortal creatures, rational and non-rational beings. However, St. Maximos does not view this vocation of man in separation from God. Rather, he states that it is Christ who achieved this unity. Again Thunberg, analyzing the Ambigua, says that man needs to leave the sphere of creation behind and be united with God beyond his own nature. Thus, man's mission in relation to creation can only be fulfilled in and through Christ: &quot;Man created in the image of God is thus, according to Maximus, a key to understanding creation not only in order that he may understand it as it is, but also that by actively understanding it in his process of divinization he may elevate it to the supreme level of its full soteriological comprehension (Ambigua 10).&quot; (Thunberg, &quot;Man and the Cosmos, p.76).<br />
<br />
St. Gregory of Nyssa also uses the image of man and microcosm, though his use of the expression is rather less uniform than for St. Maximos. In his conception, the parallelism seems to be limited to a common praise of God&quot;: as the cosmos continuously lifts up a hymn of praise to God, so it is the duty of man to engage in continual psalmody and hymnody.&quot; Metr. Paulos Gregorios postulates that St. Gregory's reservation regarding a more in-depth parallelism stemmed from a concern that man's high standing within creation not be attributed to his similarity to the universe (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man&quot;). However, St. Gregory also views man as a mediator, between creation and God, whose mediation is made possible by the incarnation: &quot;in Christ, Man, and through Man, the whole creation, directly and without intermediaries, participates in the creative energies of God Himself&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;Cosmic Man, p.103).<br />
<br />
Fr. Stanley Harakas summarizes the Orthodox position thus far: &quot;[t]he creation exists for the use of humanity; but humanity exists as a microcosm to sanctify creation and to draw it into the fullness of the life of the kingdom of God, to bring it into communion with its maker.&quot; (''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.73) <br />
<br />
While both St. Maximos and St. Gregory note that the mediation of man is directly related to Christ's incarnation. the details of that mediation are filled in by modern day theologians.<br />
<br />
===Man as Priest of Creation===<br />
<br />
The Genesis passage which started this article is open to other interpretations. One such interpretation, which gives man a certain responsibility towards the environment, presents the commission which was given to man as a stewardship. K.M. George in his essay &quot;Towards a Eucharistic Ecology&quot; points out that good stewardship, in the sense of the Greek 'oikonomos:'—manager or administrator of a house,—requires trustworthiness, dependability, and wisdom. He goes on to add: &quot;[w]e offer the creation as a thank-offering to God in liturgy&quot; (George, ''Towards a Eucharistic Theology'', in &quot;Justice, Peace and the Integrily of Creation&quot;, p.46). This statement contains within it the seed for the idea of that several contemporary theologians, among them Vigen Guroian, Metr. Paulos Gregorios, and Metr. John Zizioulas, consider as the most important in defining man's relationship to creation: man as 'priest of creation.' <br />
<br />
Metr. Paulos Gregorios of the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East and one of the most ardent advocates of Christian ecology wrote, &quot;Nature, man, and God are not three disjunct realities on the stage with a space-interval between their respective boundaries. [...] Christ has become part of creation, and in his created body he lifted up the creation to God, and humankind must participate in this eternal priesthood of Christ&quot; (Gregorios, &quot;The Human Presence&quot;). Metr. John Zizioulas adds: &quot;The priest is the one who takes in his hands the world to refer it to God and who, in return brings God's blessing to what he refers to God. Through this act creation is brought into communion with God himself. [...] This role of the human being as the priest of creation, is absolutely necessary for creation itself, because without this reference of creation to God the whole created universe will die.&quot; He goes on to argue that ethics, as commonly understood, cannot provide a solution for the environmental problem; this is the place of the Church. Specifically, the metropolitan mentions fasting, respect for the material world and acknowledgement (within the Liturgy) that creation belongs to God as specific means by which the Church can effect change (Zizioulas, ''Man the Priest of Creation: A Response to the Ecological Problem,'' in &quot;Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World&quot;). <br />
<br />
The exercise of this priesthood encompasses both our lives within the church temple (the Liturgy) and outside of it (the liturgy before/after the liturgy).<br />
<br />
==Man and Material Creation: Practical Aspects==<br />
<br />
Within the liturgical context, the Church provides prayers for the blessing of material goods: homes, crops, vehicles. There are prayers asking for rain and for deliverance from earthquakes and other calamities. We see the presence of God everywhere in creation and we ask for His help in every endeavour. Partially in acknowledgment of that fact and partially in response to the ecological crisis, Monk Gerasimos of the Skete of Saint Anne has composed a Vespers for the preservation of creation. Even earlier, in 1934, Metropolitan Tryphon Turkestanov had composed an Akathist in Praise of God's Creation.<br />
<br />
Additionally, the prayers of the Lesser Blessing of the Waters include the following petitions:<br />
<br />
* That this water might be hallowed by the might, and operation, and descent of the Holy Spirit; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may descend upon these waters the cleansing operation of the supersubstantial Trinity; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That this water may be to the healing of souls and bodies, and to the banishment of every hostile power; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
* That there may be sent down upon it the Grace of Redemption, the blessing of the Jordan; let us pray to the Lord.<br />
<br />
In the prayer of sanctification of the same service, the priest asks: &quot;do You, the same Lord and King Who loves mankind, Who has granted to us to clothe ourselves in the garment of snowy whiteness, by water and by Spirit: send down on us Your blessing, and through the partaking of this water, through sprinkling with it, wash away the defilement of passions.&quot;<br />
<br />
These services and prayers illustrate one necessary aspect of our relationship with creation: prayer for the well-being and sanctification of the world. It is our role as mediators between creation and God to ask for God's action in behalf of the world which &quot;not of its own will&quot; has been subjected to corruption. (Archimandrite Vasileios, &quot;Monasticism and Ecology&quot;, cf. Rom 8:20).<br />
<br />
God's action in creation and creation's role in our journey towards God culminate in the gifts of bread and wine which are brought forth to be consecrated to become the Holy Body and Blood of Christ. In the Eucharist, man, as the priest of creation, offers creation back to the Creator and then receives it back sanctified and transformed into the very God to Whom it was offered. As Orthodox we believe that the Eucharist sanctifies the whole creation. As Fr. Emmanuel Clapsis has said, in the Eucharist we embrace in prayer the whole creation and no longer seek our salvation apart from the world.<br />
<br />
In practical terms, we need to remember that the environmental problem is directly related to other ethical issues. While there are several actions which have a direct effect on the environmental problem (e.g., recycling, re-use of materials such as plastic bags), the greater issue of the environment encompasses many facets of life.<br />
<br />
The main cause of the environmental problem is the increase in the consumption of goods in Western society over the last two centuries, without a corresponding concern for the disposal of resulting waste and the care and renewal of the natural raw materials needed to create the goods. For a true solution to the environmental crisis, both sides of this main cause need to be addressed. On the one hand, the Church needs to support efforts which are aimed at finding better waste-management system, more efficient technologies and at the replenishment of natural resources (e.g, reforestation efforts). In this spirit, Anestis Keselopoulos states: &quot;The slogan of a return to some pre-scientific civilization is today not merely a utopia, but may be a disaster for humanity. When man loses his ability to overcome nature, he does not attain to a true relationship with nature, nor does he preserve its purpose; he simply achieves a vegetative' state. This word does not denote man's return to nature, but his identification with nature in the realm of decay and death.&quot; (Keselopoulos, &quot;Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian,&quot; p.60-61).<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the biggest contribution of the Church is her understanding of the need for an ascetic component to every person's life. In terms of material goods, the Church has never embraced the slogan that &quot;more is better.&quot; While not dismissing material possessions, she has always stressed that the true treasure is spiritual in nature. Thus, another responsibility of man in relation to creation is the implementation of this understanding into daily life. For the Church as a body, the responsibility translates inot educating the world about the true value of possessions as a part of her ministry to God's creation.<br />
<br />
The report &quot;Orthodox Perspectives on Creation&quot; states that &quot;the contemporary world must repent for the abuses which we have imposed upon the natural world. In this context, we need to remember the Orthodox concept of repentance (metanoia), which implies a complete change of heart. We need, therefore, not only to acknowledge our past mistakes, but to take action first to stop further abuses, and then, wherever possible, to revert the damage already done. As Fr. Stanley Harakas states in &quot;The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues:&quot; &quot;[h]umanity must come to see itself as intimately related to the non-human creation, to see itself as one with it in deep and profound community with it.&quot; (Harakas, ''The Integrity of Creation: Ethical Issues'', &quot;In Justice, Peace, and the Integrity of Creation,&quot; p.79)<br />
<br />
We started this look at an Orthodox perspective on environmental ethics by looking at the accusation that Christianity bears a great share of the responsibility for the current environmental problem. However, we have seen that the sanctification of creation is part and parcel of the mission of Christianity. Our attitude towards creation is well summarized by St. John of Damascus &quot;I worship the Creator of matter who became matter for my sake, who willed to take His abode in matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. Never will I cease honoring the matter which wrought my salvation! I honor it, but not as God... [but] because God has filled it with His grace and power.&quot; (On the Divine Images 1.16) <br />
<br />
==Articles on Environmental Issues==<br />
*[[Global Warming]]<br />
<br />
==Orthodox Books==<br />
*''Ecology and monasticism'' by Archimadrite Vasileios of Stavronikita (Alexander Press 1996) (ISBN 1896800025)<br />
*''Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Insights from Orthodox'', Gennadios Limouris, Ed.(WCC Publications, 1990) (ISBN 2825409790)<br />
*''Man and the Environment: a Study of St. Symeon the New Theologian'', by Anestes Keselopoulos (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001) (ISBN 088141221X)<br />
*''On the Divine Images'', by St. John of Damascus (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1980) (ISBN 0913836621)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Other helpful articles==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/miscellaneous.htm#environment Articles on the Environment] from the [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org Orthodox Research Institute] <br />
<br />
*[http://www.ec-patr.gr/docdisplay.php?lang=en&amp;cat=10 Ecological Activities of the Ecumenical Patriarchate] from the [http://www.ec-patr.gr/default.php?lang=en Official Ecumenical Patriarchate Website]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Holy_WeekHoly Week2007-02-19T15:15:55Z<p>Vandrona: Readings for Presanctified Liturgy on M, T, W</p>
<hr />
<div>For the Orthodox Christian, '''Holy Week''' is the week from the conclusion of [[Great Lent]] on the Saturday of Lazarus to the celebration of [[Pascha]]. This week is also often called the '''Great and Holy Week'''.<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
While little is recorded of the development of the celebrations of the Holy Week during the early years of the Church, it apparently had very early origins. By the fourth century the celebration of the week appears well founded and to be similar to our celebrations today. The pilgrim Aetheria to Jerusalem in the latter part of the fourth century described the events of the week after the services of Saturday of Lazarus, &quot;...began the week of the Pasch, which they called here the '''Great Week'''&quot;, noting the procession commemorating Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem on the first day of the week. It is during this week that we remember Christ's Passion and Crucifixion.<br />
[[Image:raisingoflazarus.jpg|right|frame|The Raising of Lazarus]]<br />
<br />
==The Holy Week==<br />
As leave is taken from Great Lent with the celebration of the Saturday of Lazarus, which remembers Christ's raising of Lazarus from the dead and the promise of universal resurrection for all, a week is entered during which the church services remember Christ's last week, the Holy Week, before his crucifixion and resurrection, During this week the [[Matins]] Services for the upcoming day is celebrated the evening before, in accordance with the ancient definition that the day is from sunset to sunset. [[Image:Palm_Sunday.jpg|left|thumb|Icon of Christ's entry into Jerusalem]][[Image:extremehumility.jpg|right|thumb|Christ the Bridegroom]]<br />
<br />
===Palm Sunday===<br />
The first day of Holy Week begins with [[Vespers]] of Saturday evening leading to the celebration of the services of '''Our Lord's Entry into Jerusalem''' the next morning, Sunday. In the western world this day is usually called ''[[Palm Sunday]]''. As Christ makes his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, his divine kingdom on Earth is proclaimed under the branches of the palm tree.<br />
<br />
===Holy Monday===<br />
The first three days of Holy Week remind us of Christ's last instructions with his disciples. These teachings are remembered in the celebration of the Great Compline, Matins, Hours, and Liturgy during these days. The [[Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts]] celebrated these days includes readings from [[Exodus]] and [[Book of Job|Job]] and [[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] <br />
<br />
The Matins services of the evenings of Palm Sunday, and '''Holy Monday''', and '''Holy Tuesday''', anticipating the events of the next day, share a common theme devoted to the [[Bridegroom]] Services derived from the Parable of the Ten Virgins that calls for preparedness at the Second Coming, for the &quot;thief comes in the middle of the night.&quot; (Matt. 26:1-13)<br />
===Holy Wednesday===<br />
The Mysterion or [[Sacrament]] of [[Holy Unction]] is celebrated on '''Holy Wednesday''', commemorating Christ's anointing with myrrh. The service ends with the priest anointing the faithful with Holy Oil. Also, remembered is that on this day Judas betrayed Christ, which led to the tradition from Apostolic times of fasting on Wednesday throughout the year.<br />
===Holy Thursday===<br />
'''Holy Thursday''' begins with the celebration of vespers and the [[Divine Liturgy]] of St. Basil with a Reserved [[Holy Communion]] in representation of the earthly presence of Christ realized at the [[Last Supper]]. In the evening, anticipating the Matins of Friday morning, the Holy Passion service of the reading of the '''Twelve Gospel''' is conducted. In these readings Christ's last instructions to his disciples are presented, as well as the prophecy of the drama of the Cross, Christ's prayer, and his new commandment. The twelve readings are: [[Image:mysticalsupper.jpg|left|thumb|The Mystical Supper]][[Image:crucifixion.jpg|right|thumb|Crucifixion]]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20John%2013:31%20-%2018:1;&amp;version=9; John 13:31-18:1]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2018:1%20-%2029;&amp;version=9; John 18:1-29 ]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2026:57%20-%2075;&amp;version=9; Matthew 26:57-75 ]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20John%2018:28%20-%2019:16%20;&amp;version=9; John 18:28&amp;ndash;19:16]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20Matthew%2027:3%20-%2032;&amp;version=9; Matthew 27:3-32]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20Mark%2015:16%20-%2032;&amp;version=9; Mark 15:16-32]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20Matthew%2027:33%20-%2054;&amp;version=9; Matthew 27:33-54]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20Luke%2023:32%20-%2049;&amp;version=9; Luke 23:32-49]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20John%2019:19%20-%2037;&amp;version=9; John 19:19-37]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20Mark%2015:43%20-%2047;&amp;version=9; Mark 15:43-47]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20John%2019:38%20-%2042;&amp;version=9; John 19:38-42]<br />
* [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=St.%20Matthew%2027:62%20-%2066;&amp;version=9; Matthew 27:62-66]<br />
<br />
===Good Friday===<br />
'''Great and Holy Friday''' begins with reading of the [[Royal Hours]] leading up to Vespers of Friday afternoon during which the removal of the Body of Christ from the Cross is commemorated. The [[priest]] removes the Body of Christ, the [[Epitaphios]], from the Cross, wraps it in a white cloth and carries it into the [[altar]]. In an evening service, called the Lamentations at the Tomb, the priest carries the Epitaphios, the painted or embroidered cloth representation of Christ, from the altar around the [[church]] before placing it in the Sepulcher, a bier symbolizing the Tomb of Christ. This procession, with the faithful carrying lighted candles, represents Christ's descent into Hades. [[Image:epitaphios.jpg|left|frame|Epitaphios]]<br />
===Holy Saturday===<br />
'''Great and Holy Saturday''' Vespers and a Divine Liturgy of St. Basil are served, marked with readings of [[Psalms]] and Resurrection [[hymns]] that tell of Christ's descent into Hades, celebrated as the &quot;First Resurrection&quot; of Adam and the conquering of Death.<br />
==Pascha==<br />
[[Image:pascha.jpg|right|frame|The Resurrection of Christ]]<br />
'''Easter''' or '''[[Pascha]]''', the '''Feast of Feasts''', celebrations begins just before midnight with the singing of the Odes of Lamentation as the Resurrection Vespers begins with the church in complete darkness. As midnight approaches the priest taking a light from a vigil light within the altar passes the flame to the faithful for their candles while singing &quot;Come ye and receive light from the unwaning life, and, glorify Christ, who arose from the dead.&quot; Then, the priest leads the faithful out of the church in procession. After circling the church either one or three times, as the procession nears the entrance door of the church, the priest leads in the singing of the hymn of Resurrection. &quot;Christ has Risen from the dead, by death trampling upon Death, and has bestowed life upon those in the tombs&quot; At this point the priest and faithful enter the well-lighted church for the remaining part of Vespers and the breaking of the [[fast]] with the [[Divine Liturgy]]. <br />
After conclusion of the Divine Liturgy, in many communities, the faithful retire to an ''agape'' meal to break the Fast together, and then return home as dawn arrives. Later in the day of Pascha the faithful again gather for prayer with lighted candles in a vespers service, singing the hymn &quot;Christ is Risen from the Dead,&quot; and greeting each other joyously &quot;[[Paschal greeting|Christ is Risen]]&quot; and responding with &quot;Truly He is Risen.&quot;<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
* [http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8432.asp Holy Week GOARCH] <br />
* [http://www.holy-trinity.org/feasts/holyweek.html Holy Week and Pascha] <br />
* [http://holytrinity.ok.goarch.org/holy_week.html Holy Week]<br />
* [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/holy_week2_e.htm Approach to Holy Week]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Featured Articles]]<br />
[[Category:Lent]]<br />
[[Category:Liturgics]]<br />
<br />
[[ro:Săptămâna Patimilor]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Great_LentGreat Lent2007-02-19T15:04:06Z<p>Vandrona: Job is read in Holy Week, but since that's not technically Great Lent, I'll move it there</p>
<hr />
<div>'''The Great Fast''' or ''Lent'' is the period of preparation leading up to [[Holy Week]] and [[Pascha]]. The [[Lenten Triodion]] governs the divine services of Great Lent as well as those of the Weeks of Preparation preceding Great Lent. ''Lent'' is a Middle English word meaning &quot;spring.&quot; The Great Fast has come to be called Lent by association; it is called &quot;great&quot; to distinguish it from the other [[fast]]s.<br />
<br />
Following [[Meatfare Sunday]], meats are removed from the diet. Following [[Cheesefare Sunday]] (also known as [[Forgiveness Sunday]]), dairy is removed, initiating the strict [[fasting]] of Great Lent. During Great Lent, the weekday [[pericope|reading]]s are taken only from the [[Old Testament]], focusing on [[Genesis]], [[Book of Proverbs|Proverbs]], and [[Book of Isaiah|Isaiah]].<br />
<br />
==Structure of Great Lent==<br />
: Monday following [[Forgiveness Sunday]] (also called [[Cheesefare Sunday]])<br />
:1. [[Sunday of Orthodoxy]] ([[Gospel of John|John]] 1:43-51), <br />
:2. [[Sunday of St. Gregory Palamas]],<br />
:3. [[Sunday of the Holy Cross]],<br />
:4. [[Sunday of St. John Climacus]], and<br />
:5. [[Sunday of St. Mary of Egypt]].<br />
<br />
<br />
Great Lent is followed by [[Holy Week]], the week beginning with [[Palm Sunday]] and preceding Pascha.<br />
<br />
==Purpose of Great Lent==<br />
The original purpose of the pre-Pascha fast (now known as Great Lent) was the fasting of catechumens who were being prepared for baptism and entry into the Church. However, it quickly became a time for those who were already Christian to prepare for the feast of the Resurrection of Christ. It is the living symbol of man's entire life which is to be fulfilled in his own resurrection from the dead with Christ. It is a time of renewed devotion: of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving. It is a time of repentance, a real renewal of minds, hearts and deeds in conformity with Christ and his teachings. It is the time, most of all, of return to the great commandments of loving God and neighbors.<br />
<br />
&lt;!--- ==Church Fathers on Great Lent== ---&gt;<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Almsgiving]]<br />
*[[Confession]]<br />
*[[Fasting]]<br />
*[[Pascha]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Asceticism]]<br />
[[Category:Church Life]]<br />
[[Category:Liturgics]]<br />
[[Category:Lent|*]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Environmental_ethicsEnvironmental ethics2007-02-16T15:26:29Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>There is a myth that Christianity is responsible for ecological destruction: by placing Man at the center of creation, by claiming dominion for him over the rest of the visible world, the Church has opened the door to widespread devastation of the environment.<br />
<br />
But Christianity does not say that man can do whatever he wants to the environment, to other creatures. He is only a steward, and will be held accountable to God for his works. The world was not given for us to abuse or destroy, but to tend and nurture. The cosmos is alive with the glory of God, and the Christian teaching is that we should regard it with awe and wonder, and show reverence for all of life.<br />
<br />
The view that we may treat the world as a machine, to exploit to our own ends, is a product of the &quot;Enlightenment&quot; and the Industrial age, not of Christianity, and is ultimately self-destructive.<br />
<br />
During an international Orthodox conference in 1995, held on the holy island of Patmos, the participating theologians came to the conclusion that pollution is a sin.<br />
==Articles on Environmental Issues==<br />
*[[Global Warming]]<br />
<br />
==Orthodox Books==<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Other helpful articles==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/miscellaneous.htm#environment Articles on the Environment] from the [http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org Orthodox Research Institute] <br />
<br />
*[http://www.ec-patr.gr/docdisplay.php?lang=en&amp;cat=10 Ecological Activities of the Ecumenical Patriarchate] from the [http://www.ec-patr.gr/default.php?lang=en Official Ecumenical Patriarchate Website]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ASDamickUser talk:ASDamick2006-06-10T02:38:31Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>Welcome to the Talk page of [[User:ASDamick|ASDamick]]. Please leave your message below the line.<br />
<br />
* [[/Archive 1|Archive 1]]<br />
* [[/Archive 2|Archive 2]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== Featured article ==<br />
<br />
Dn., I was thinking it would be nice to do something of a [[Nativity]] theme through [[January 7]] or so. However, it doesn't look like we have enough information on OrthodoxWiki for that yet. I'll let St. [[Gregory Palamas]] take a turn for now, but I would like your feedback about the Nativity-theme idea. {{User:Magda/sig}} 11:13, December 23, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Well, of course I was hoping you'd provide that. :) I don't have as much knowledge and understanding as I would like to do what I want with this; still more questions than answers.<br />
:There's already [[Nativity]] and [[Nativity Icon]], and [[Incarnation]], but these need more expansion before I would want them to be featured. However, there could be other aspects as well, maybe a ''Hymns of the Nativity'' which talks about the theological importance; an article on the ''Magi''; and the geneology or forefathers of Christ; I'd love to see one which talks about Christ as the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophesies; ''Herod'' and ''Holy Innocents'' might be a good idea, talking about the world's reaction to the birth. You know, because everyone will have plenty of free time to get this up for this year... {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:48, December 23, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== On Egypt, Constantinople, Jerusalem, etc. ==<br />
<br />
You are right. I guess you need a &quot;disambiguiation page&quot; here. Same applies to Jerusalem (as a city/place of importance in Christendom and not just a patriarchal see). ER<br />
<br />
== e-vangelism ==<br />
<br />
Hey. For the [[e-vangelism]] page hte entry is not refering to the evangelical church movement. It is making reference to the literal meaning of the word. [http://http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:Dcndavid#e-vangelism Message to DcnDavid]<br />
I have made a new format for the entry if you want to view it. (This probably meets the style and content better).<br />
&lt;nowiki&gt;An e-vangelist is a person who uses the Internet to present the Christian gospel message to the world. <br />
<br />
== Biblical Role ==<br />
<br />
The role of an evangelist or e-vangelist in conjunction with the [[apostles]], [[prophets]], [[pastors]] and [[teachers]] is described in '''[[Ephesians]] 4:11-13'''<br />
<br />
&quot;''11He is the one who gave these gifts to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers. 12Their responsibility is to equip God's people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ, 13until we come to such unity in our faith and knowledge of God's Son that we will be mature and full grown in the Lord, measuring up to the full stature of Christ.'' '''&quot;Ephesians 4:11-13'''<br />
<br />
<br />
'''SEE ALSO'''<br />
<br />
----<br />
*[[Evangelism]]<br />
*[[internet evangelism]]<br />
<br />
'''EXTERNAL LINKS'''<br />
<br />
----<br />
*[http://www.e-vangelist.true.ws E-vangelism.official.ws]&lt;/nowiki&gt;<br />
--[[User:Ari|Ari]] 22:45, January 2, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== New Martyr circle ==<br />
<br />
[[Saint titles]] has a link to [[New-martyr]] which redirects to [[New Martyrs]] which redirects to [[Saint titles]]. [[New-Martyr]] is the main redirect (in all the calendric pages) to [[Saint titles]]. Perhaps I should have changed the link on the [[OrthodoxWiki:Articles from the DEC]] page so it would be to ''New-Martyr'' insteada of creating ''New Martyrs'' as another redirect. {{User:Magda/sig}} 15:34, January 3, 2006 (CST)<br />
:I suspected as much; hence my comment, rather than trying to &quot;fix&quot; things. :) {{User:Magda/sig}} 15:36, January 3, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Eve ==<br />
<br />
Dn. Andrew, when I search for &quot;Eve&quot; I am redirected to [[Adam and Eve]], but when I get to the search page (as opposed to using the search in the nav-bar), I get no hits at all. Any suggestions? (My preferences are set such that all of the namespaces are selected as a range, and I don't have a problem with searching for &quot;Adam.&quot;) {{User:Magda/sig}} 08:34, January 4, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Redundancies==<br />
<br />
Dn. Andrew: Thanks for the heads up. It struck me after I added the Japan banner. Your comment confirmed it. I must say your are quick on the editting. I don't mind it as I keep finding I left something out or missed somewhere and I find it nice having yours and Magda's editting help.[[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 10:07, January 5, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Bishop v. Hierarch, Patriarch v. Primate ==<br />
<br />
When creating categories and lists, do you think it would be better to use the current title of a see, e.g. ''bishop'', or a more general title, e.g., ''hierarch''? I'm looking at [[:Category:Bishops]].<br />
<br />
To take an example, [[List of Patriarchs of Constantinople]] has bishops of Byzantium, bishops of Constantinople, archbishops of Constantinople, and then patriarchs of Constantinople. The listings, i.e., each bishop, would potentially be included in a similar category: [[:Category:Patriarchs of Constantinople]]. However, those falling under &quot;bishops of Byzantium&quot; might not be included in this category (cf. [[Apostle Andrew]]). That's why I am trying to think of a better way to organize.<br />
<br />
The options as I see them:<br />
# If the see is ''now'' a (bishopric/archbishopric/patriarchate), all the hierarchs of that see will be included in a list and category of (bishops/archbishops/patriarchs) of that see.<br />
# For any given see, the ''hierarch'' would be included in the list and category of ''hierarchs'' of that see; any see which is now a patriarchate will have its primates included ''instead'' in the list and category of ''primates'' of that patriarchate.<br />
# Each category and list will be its own individual entity.<br />
<br />
Your thoughts? {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:24, January 5, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Your patent answers (which I never seem to think of) are why I keep asking you questions. Thank you. {{User:Magda/sig}} 10:47, January 6, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Iakovos correspondence ==<br />
<br />
The only other place I can find this information is the [[Wikipedia:Iakovos, Archbishop of America|Wikipedia page]]. Currently, the website of the Department of Pastoral and Social Theology of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki is down. {{User:Magda/sig}} 20:29, January 7, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== St. Tikhon's Photo ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St_Tikhons_Monastery.jpg|100 px]] Would you mind if I reuploaded your St. Tikhon's photo, with the power lines Photoshopped out? -[[User:HiFiGuy|HiFiGuy]] 11:47, February 2, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Only because I think that the power lines are distracting; if you look for photos of The Alamo, you'll frequently find a giant sign for the Crockett Hotel in the background... unless they've been Photoshopped out--and it frequently has been. Imagine if you could get a ladder and take a photo of the church from right at the power lines (so they wouldn't appear in the photo). Failing that, it's much easier to just make a little tweak. On the other hand, maybe a photo with the power lines in will encourage a donor to help pay to bury them. This is merely a suggestion; I thought I'd ask here, first. -[[User:HiFiGuy|HiFiGuy]] 12:56, February 2, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Capping of headings and sub-headings ==<br />
<br />
I noticed that you edited a recent editing of mine which capitalized &quot;External links&quot; in the article on his emminence [[Dmitri (Royster) of Dallas|Dmitri]]. I'm curious why some headings get title case and others get sentence case. Even in the style guide, which doesn't mention them specifically, there appears to be inconsistency. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 23:44, March 11, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
:<br />
:Thanks for the reply. I figured something along those lines was up. Also, I '''totally agree''' with your assessment of the misuse of title case in much English-speaking Orthodoxy. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 18:14, March 13, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Alternate flag/cross image ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Orthodox us.gif|thumb|left]]I am not sure exactly why, but the current image used to mark pages discussing Orthodoxy in the US, using the orthodoxyinamerica template, has always bugged me, almost to the point of offense. I think perhaps it is because the presentation is so direct, almost confrontive, and the impression to me is of a single, new flag --- a sort of Byzantine Empire of America flag --- not a flag with a cross superimposed.<br />
<br />
I've whipped up an alternative. It's clearly inspired by your original image --- even to the point of using the original pectoral cross --- but uses a photo of a US flag flying in the wind (actually taken on Liberty Island). Since your original image is in the PD, and the image of the flag was taken from stock.xchng and has no restrictions, I've attached a CC license. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 22:02, March 13, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
:<br />
:I'm glad you like it. Thanks for the info on the cross. I seem to remember seeing it as a wall cross, now that you mention it, and I'm sure I own one that is in the possession of someone else right now. (Military life and all.) --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 06:13, March 15, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== A question ==<br />
<br />
See my question on the [[Theotokos]] TALK page. If you could find the time to explain that to me, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.<br />
<br />
[[User:Acedaroflebanon|Acedaroflebanon]] 12:32, March 19, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Thanks for the Reminder ==<br />
<br />
Thank you for reminding me about obtaining proper permission. All of the images have now been confirmed by OCA. [[User:Pkdimarco|Pkdimarco]] 15:55, April 12, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Picture==<br />
I tried to restore your picture (Image:Andrew Stephen Damick.jpg) after it had been deleted after a vandal attack, but (it seems) failed; sorry. --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 20:54, April 17, 2006 (CDT), edited 07:03, Apr 18, 2006.<br />
<br />
::I tried, too. I couldn't figure out how to do it. But I guarantee, no image is better than the one I deleted. {{User:Dcndavid/sig}} 21:27, April 17, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:No question. Something that I've done that I think should be a matter of course - sysop and important images (like icons) should be protected. It's just too easy to vandalise. --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 22:32, April 17, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Macedonians==<br />
Would appreciate your opinions on [[Talk:Orthodoxy in Australasia]] regarding whether the Macedonian metropolitanate should be listed as another Orthodox structure. (also posted on [[User_talk:FrJohn|Fr John]]'s talk page) --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 17:55, April 30, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==[[HOCNA]]==<br />
Thanks :) . I just got sick of there being two versions and ''still'' having the first version changed to look surprisingly like the second. --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 06:55, May 5, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==I appreciate the welcome.==<br />
Trying to figure out the text codes and graphics situation has been an interesting challenge, but I think I'm getting the hang of it (the very basics, at least.) I just noticed that you'd replied to my query about the witan, as well. <br />
<br />
Out of personal interest, were you pretty much assured of your first choice seminary once you were accepted as a seminarian? You see, my boyfriend (we're Antiochian, too) would love to go to St. Vlad's, but every now and then he has a panic attack that he could be sent off to, say, the hinterlands of Alaska. In any case, he's planning on speaking to Bishop Basil in September when the Bishop comes to Texas, so we'll see. [[User:Gabriela|Gabriela]] 15:14, May 9, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Photos==<br />
Thank you, Father Deacon. Your point is well taken - the fine point of the Law! I'll change the attribution as you recommend. Also. in up loading the photos, I first titled the files and then uploaded them without taking in account the warning of not using an '&amp;' in the file name. I tried to figure out how to remove the offending file but couldn't. I would appreciate if you could make the correction - removing the offending file.<br />
<br />
== Image question ==<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Abouna_Matta_El_Meskeen.jpg This] looks to be the source of [[:Image:416px-Abouna_Matta_El_Meskeen.jpg]]. Would this qualify as public domain, or would it still fall under GFDL? The wikipedia language states that &quot;All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License,&quot; but fails to convince me of the status of the image there. {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:38, May 16, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Standard characters for titles ==<br />
<br />
Dn. Andrew, I remembered something about using standard characters for article titles. After poking around for a while, I found the following useful: [[Talk:Daniel the Hermit]] and [[http://www2.orthodoxwiki.org/OrthodoxWiki_talk:Style_Manual#Spelling_conventions]]. Would you mind writing something up in the [[OrthodoxWiki:Style Manual]] to address this? I tried a search for &quot;Jaaskelainen&quot; and did not get to [[Ambrose (Jääskeläinen) of Helsinki]]. If we do want to have the article titles with special characters, should we have a standard-character redirect? —[[User:Magda|&lt;b&gt;magda&lt;/b&gt;]] ([[User_talk:Magda|talk]]) 10:08, May 26, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Pilgrimage ==<br />
<br />
Deacon Andrew:<br />
<br />
It looks like I'll be attending the pilgrimage again this year (thanks be to God). I'd love to meet you.<br />
<br />
Also, I know the timing is rather late, but if you have a spare patch of floor/couch/bed where a pilgrim could take shelter Sunday night, that would be the bomb. :D No pressure; just wondering. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 14:24, May 27, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Bp. Orestes==<br />
<br />
Thanks, Dn Andrew, for the change in the title for Bp. Orestes. I was not sure of all the potential titles for Bp. Orestes which one would be correct. So, you came to my rescue again! <br />
To change the subject, I notice some time ago that on the Calendar we have an 'Edward of England', September 3 I think, but in a search of the net, I have found only an 'Edward the Martyr' or an 'Edward the Confessor'. So, we have an anomoly. which Edward is 'Edward of England'? I haven't found a third! <br />
Perhaps you and/or Magda came clear up the inconsistence. Keep up the excellent work. wsk [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 11:58, May 28, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Hermas/Hermes ==<br />
<br />
Should we have [[Apostle Hermes|Apostle Herm'''e'''s]] as a disambiguation page, to distinguish between [[Apostle Hermas|Apostle Herm'''a'''s]] and [[Apostle Hermes (bishop)|Apostle Herm'''e'''s (bishop)]]? Currently on the [[Apostles]] page it may be confusing. —[[User:Magda|&lt;b&gt;magda&lt;/b&gt;]] ([[User_talk:Magda|talk]]) 11:30, May 31, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Moving over redirs==<br />
I actually just moved the article over the existing redirect, but I selected the 'delete page first' button - perhaps that's what did it. Thanks for looking out for me :). &amp;mdash; ''[[User:Pistevo|Pι]]''[[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]]'''[[User talk:Pistevo|τ]]'''[[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]]''[[User:Pistevo|vο]]'', at 20:32, May 31, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Deletes ==<br />
<br />
Yeah.. the thing is the legitimate history was already deleted. I am thinking it would be better to restore the initial delete anyway. Let me try that out instead. I just didn't want that stuff in the article history... {{User:FrJohn/sig}}<br />
<br />
==[[Greek Orthodox Metropolis of New Zealand]]==<br />
Article was protected, I assume, because of an e-mail received by the chief secretary - perhaps you've received it? &amp;mdash; edited by [[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;Pι&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]][[User talk:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;yellow&quot;&gt;τ&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]][[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;vο&lt;/font&gt;]] at 17:38, June 6, 2006 (CDT)<br />
:Basic summary (as far as I can make out) - take down the article because it is false, until the &quot;Holy Archdiocese of New Zealand, Exarchate of Oceania&quot; (sic) gives permission for a article written by someone with the Metropolitan's blessing. A takedown hasn't occured because there's no cause for such - everything on the article is a matter of public record. &amp;mdash; edited by [[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;Pι&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]][[User talk:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;yellow&quot;&gt;τ&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]][[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;vο&lt;/font&gt;]].<br />
<br />
==Axios==<br />
<br />
Thank you, Dcn. Andrew. [[User:Vandrona|Dn. Virgil]]<br />
<br />
==Priesthood==<br />
<br />
I see now how you really feel. I just joined you into the diaconate and you're already making plans to leave me behind :) Congratulations! Axios! [[User:Vandrona|Dn. Virgil]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:VandronaUser:Vandrona2006-06-09T15:46:11Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:VirgilPetrişorAndronache.jpg |thumb|right|Dn. Virgil]]<br />
My name is Dn. Virgil Petrişor Andronache. I will be starting my third year of studies at [[Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology (Brookline, Massachusetts)|Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology]]. My presence on orthodoxwiki is the work of my lovely wife, [[User:Magda|Magda]].<br />
<br />
For the 2006-2007 academic year, I will be serving as a chant group leader, the secretary for the class of 2007, treasurer for the Married Student Association, and athletic activities contact between the student body and the administration.<br />
<br />
I was born in Bacau, Romania, in 1977, but I have been in the U.S. for almost eleven years. My life before the [[seminary]] involved most recently playing with robots at the University of Notre Dame [http://www.nd.edu/~airolab Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Lab]. <br />
<br />
Despite my wife's assertions, I am not that tall and not nearly that invulnerable.<br />
<br />
I have a [http://vandrona.blogspot.com personal blog] for general thoughts and a [http://vandrona.xwiki.com personal wiki] for class notes.<br />
<br />
My patron [[saint]] is &quot;tied to&quot; my middle name: St. [[Apostle Peter|Peter]] on [[June 29]].<br />
<br />
[[Category:User Pages]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/File:VirgilPetri%C5%9ForAndronache.jpgFile:VirgilPetrişorAndronache.jpg2006-06-09T15:41:00Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Andronachecopy}}</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/File:VirgilPetri%C5%9ForAndronache.jpgFile:VirgilPetrişorAndronache.jpg2006-06-09T15:36:54Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div></div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Template:AndronachecopyTemplate:Andronachecopy2006-06-09T15:32:51Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>&lt;!-- comment to force linebreak --&gt;<br />
{| align=center border=0 cellpadding=4 cellspacing=4 style=&quot;border: 1px solid #CC9; background-color: #F1F1DE&quot;<br />
<br />
|'''Copyright &amp;copy; by Virgil Petrisor Andronache and Magda Andronache. All Rights Reserved.'''&lt;br /&gt;''Virgil Petrisor Andronache ([[User:Vandrona]]) and Magda Andronache ([[User:Magda]]) hereby grant a limited license for this content to be used in its unaltered form by '''OrthodoxWiki''''s administration and users for inclusion in articles on the website, but not to be copied outside the website or distributed in any other way.''<br />
|}[[Category:Andronache Images]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Category:Andronache_ImagesCategory:Andronache Images2006-06-09T15:31:17Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>These are images whose copyright is owned by [[User:Vandrona]] and [[User:Magda]].<br />
<br />
[[Category:By licence]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Category:Andronache_ImagesCategory:Andronache Images2006-06-09T15:28:35Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>These are images whose copyright is owned by [[User:Vandrona]] and [[User:Magda]].<br />
<br />
[[Category:By source]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:VandronaUser:Vandrona2006-06-09T15:17:47Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>My name is Dn. Virgil Petrişor Andronache. I will be starting my third year of studies at [[Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology (Brookline, Massachusetts)|Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology]]. My presence on orthodoxwiki is the work of my lovely wife, [[User:Magda|Magda]].<br />
<br />
For the 2006-2007 academic year, I will be servinga as a chant group leader, the secretary for the class of 2007, treasurer for the Married Student Association, and athletic activities contact between the student body and the administration.<br />
<br />
I was born in Bacau, Romania, in 1977, but I have been in the U.S. for almost eleven years. My life before the [[seminary]] involved most recently playing with robots at the University of Notre Dame [http://www.nd.edu/~airolab Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Lab]. <br />
<br />
Despite my wife's assertions, I am not that tall and not nearly that invulnerable.<br />
<br />
I have a [http://vandrona.blogspot.com personal blog] for general thoughts and a [http://vandrona.xwiki.com personal wiki] for class notes.<br />
<br />
My patron [[saint]] is &quot;tied to&quot; my middle name: St. [[Apostle Peter|Peter]] on [[June 29]].<br />
<br />
[[Category:User Pages]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:ASDamickUser talk:ASDamick2006-06-09T15:11:22Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>Welcome to the Talk page of [[User:ASDamick|ASDamick]]. Please leave your message below the line.<br />
<br />
* [[/Archive 1|Archive 1]]<br />
* [[/Archive 2|Archive 2]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
== Featured article ==<br />
<br />
Dn., I was thinking it would be nice to do something of a [[Nativity]] theme through [[January 7]] or so. However, it doesn't look like we have enough information on OrthodoxWiki for that yet. I'll let St. [[Gregory Palamas]] take a turn for now, but I would like your feedback about the Nativity-theme idea. {{User:Magda/sig}} 11:13, December 23, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Well, of course I was hoping you'd provide that. :) I don't have as much knowledge and understanding as I would like to do what I want with this; still more questions than answers.<br />
:There's already [[Nativity]] and [[Nativity Icon]], and [[Incarnation]], but these need more expansion before I would want them to be featured. However, there could be other aspects as well, maybe a ''Hymns of the Nativity'' which talks about the theological importance; an article on the ''Magi''; and the geneology or forefathers of Christ; I'd love to see one which talks about Christ as the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophesies; ''Herod'' and ''Holy Innocents'' might be a good idea, talking about the world's reaction to the birth. You know, because everyone will have plenty of free time to get this up for this year... {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:48, December 23, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== On Egypt, Constantinople, Jerusalem, etc. ==<br />
<br />
You are right. I guess you need a &quot;disambiguiation page&quot; here. Same applies to Jerusalem (as a city/place of importance in Christendom and not just a patriarchal see). ER<br />
<br />
== e-vangelism ==<br />
<br />
Hey. For the [[e-vangelism]] page hte entry is not refering to the evangelical church movement. It is making reference to the literal meaning of the word. [http://http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:Dcndavid#e-vangelism Message to DcnDavid]<br />
I have made a new format for the entry if you want to view it. (This probably meets the style and content better).<br />
&lt;nowiki&gt;An e-vangelist is a person who uses the Internet to present the Christian gospel message to the world. <br />
<br />
== Biblical Role ==<br />
<br />
The role of an evangelist or e-vangelist in conjunction with the [[apostles]], [[prophets]], [[pastors]] and [[teachers]] is described in '''[[Ephesians]] 4:11-13'''<br />
<br />
&quot;''11He is the one who gave these gifts to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers. 12Their responsibility is to equip God's people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ, 13until we come to such unity in our faith and knowledge of God's Son that we will be mature and full grown in the Lord, measuring up to the full stature of Christ.'' '''&quot;Ephesians 4:11-13'''<br />
<br />
<br />
'''SEE ALSO'''<br />
<br />
----<br />
*[[Evangelism]]<br />
*[[internet evangelism]]<br />
<br />
'''EXTERNAL LINKS'''<br />
<br />
----<br />
*[http://www.e-vangelist.true.ws E-vangelism.official.ws]&lt;/nowiki&gt;<br />
--[[User:Ari|Ari]] 22:45, January 2, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== New Martyr circle ==<br />
<br />
[[Saint titles]] has a link to [[New-martyr]] which redirects to [[New Martyrs]] which redirects to [[Saint titles]]. [[New-Martyr]] is the main redirect (in all the calendric pages) to [[Saint titles]]. Perhaps I should have changed the link on the [[OrthodoxWiki:Articles from the DEC]] page so it would be to ''New-Martyr'' insteada of creating ''New Martyrs'' as another redirect. {{User:Magda/sig}} 15:34, January 3, 2006 (CST)<br />
:I suspected as much; hence my comment, rather than trying to &quot;fix&quot; things. :) {{User:Magda/sig}} 15:36, January 3, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Eve ==<br />
<br />
Dn. Andrew, when I search for &quot;Eve&quot; I am redirected to [[Adam and Eve]], but when I get to the search page (as opposed to using the search in the nav-bar), I get no hits at all. Any suggestions? (My preferences are set such that all of the namespaces are selected as a range, and I don't have a problem with searching for &quot;Adam.&quot;) {{User:Magda/sig}} 08:34, January 4, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Redundancies==<br />
<br />
Dn. Andrew: Thanks for the heads up. It struck me after I added the Japan banner. Your comment confirmed it. I must say your are quick on the editting. I don't mind it as I keep finding I left something out or missed somewhere and I find it nice having yours and Magda's editting help.[[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 10:07, January 5, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Bishop v. Hierarch, Patriarch v. Primate ==<br />
<br />
When creating categories and lists, do you think it would be better to use the current title of a see, e.g. ''bishop'', or a more general title, e.g., ''hierarch''? I'm looking at [[:Category:Bishops]].<br />
<br />
To take an example, [[List of Patriarchs of Constantinople]] has bishops of Byzantium, bishops of Constantinople, archbishops of Constantinople, and then patriarchs of Constantinople. The listings, i.e., each bishop, would potentially be included in a similar category: [[:Category:Patriarchs of Constantinople]]. However, those falling under &quot;bishops of Byzantium&quot; might not be included in this category (cf. [[Apostle Andrew]]). That's why I am trying to think of a better way to organize.<br />
<br />
The options as I see them:<br />
# If the see is ''now'' a (bishopric/archbishopric/patriarchate), all the hierarchs of that see will be included in a list and category of (bishops/archbishops/patriarchs) of that see.<br />
# For any given see, the ''hierarch'' would be included in the list and category of ''hierarchs'' of that see; any see which is now a patriarchate will have its primates included ''instead'' in the list and category of ''primates'' of that patriarchate.<br />
# Each category and list will be its own individual entity.<br />
<br />
Your thoughts? {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:24, January 5, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Your patent answers (which I never seem to think of) are why I keep asking you questions. Thank you. {{User:Magda/sig}} 10:47, January 6, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Iakovos correspondence ==<br />
<br />
The only other place I can find this information is the [[Wikipedia:Iakovos, Archbishop of America|Wikipedia page]]. Currently, the website of the Department of Pastoral and Social Theology of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki is down. {{User:Magda/sig}} 20:29, January 7, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== St. Tikhon's Photo ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St_Tikhons_Monastery.jpg|100 px]] Would you mind if I reuploaded your St. Tikhon's photo, with the power lines Photoshopped out? -[[User:HiFiGuy|HiFiGuy]] 11:47, February 2, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Only because I think that the power lines are distracting; if you look for photos of The Alamo, you'll frequently find a giant sign for the Crockett Hotel in the background... unless they've been Photoshopped out--and it frequently has been. Imagine if you could get a ladder and take a photo of the church from right at the power lines (so they wouldn't appear in the photo). Failing that, it's much easier to just make a little tweak. On the other hand, maybe a photo with the power lines in will encourage a donor to help pay to bury them. This is merely a suggestion; I thought I'd ask here, first. -[[User:HiFiGuy|HiFiGuy]] 12:56, February 2, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Capping of headings and sub-headings ==<br />
<br />
I noticed that you edited a recent editing of mine which capitalized &quot;External links&quot; in the article on his emminence [[Dmitri (Royster) of Dallas|Dmitri]]. I'm curious why some headings get title case and others get sentence case. Even in the style guide, which doesn't mention them specifically, there appears to be inconsistency. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 23:44, March 11, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
:<br />
:Thanks for the reply. I figured something along those lines was up. Also, I '''totally agree''' with your assessment of the misuse of title case in much English-speaking Orthodoxy. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 18:14, March 13, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Alternate flag/cross image ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Orthodox us.gif|thumb|left]]I am not sure exactly why, but the current image used to mark pages discussing Orthodoxy in the US, using the orthodoxyinamerica template, has always bugged me, almost to the point of offense. I think perhaps it is because the presentation is so direct, almost confrontive, and the impression to me is of a single, new flag --- a sort of Byzantine Empire of America flag --- not a flag with a cross superimposed.<br />
<br />
I've whipped up an alternative. It's clearly inspired by your original image --- even to the point of using the original pectoral cross --- but uses a photo of a US flag flying in the wind (actually taken on Liberty Island). Since your original image is in the PD, and the image of the flag was taken from stock.xchng and has no restrictions, I've attached a CC license. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 22:02, March 13, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
:<br />
:I'm glad you like it. Thanks for the info on the cross. I seem to remember seeing it as a wall cross, now that you mention it, and I'm sure I own one that is in the possession of someone else right now. (Military life and all.) --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 06:13, March 15, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== A question ==<br />
<br />
See my question on the [[Theotokos]] TALK page. If you could find the time to explain that to me, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.<br />
<br />
[[User:Acedaroflebanon|Acedaroflebanon]] 12:32, March 19, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Thanks for the Reminder ==<br />
<br />
Thank you for reminding me about obtaining proper permission. All of the images have now been confirmed by OCA. [[User:Pkdimarco|Pkdimarco]] 15:55, April 12, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Picture==<br />
I tried to restore your picture (Image:Andrew Stephen Damick.jpg) after it had been deleted after a vandal attack, but (it seems) failed; sorry. --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 20:54, April 17, 2006 (CDT), edited 07:03, Apr 18, 2006.<br />
<br />
::I tried, too. I couldn't figure out how to do it. But I guarantee, no image is better than the one I deleted. {{User:Dcndavid/sig}} 21:27, April 17, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:No question. Something that I've done that I think should be a matter of course - sysop and important images (like icons) should be protected. It's just too easy to vandalise. --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 22:32, April 17, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Macedonians==<br />
Would appreciate your opinions on [[Talk:Orthodoxy in Australasia]] regarding whether the Macedonian metropolitanate should be listed as another Orthodox structure. (also posted on [[User_talk:FrJohn|Fr John]]'s talk page) --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 17:55, April 30, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==[[HOCNA]]==<br />
Thanks :) . I just got sick of there being two versions and ''still'' having the first version changed to look surprisingly like the second. --{{User:Pistevo/sig}} 06:55, May 5, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==I appreciate the welcome.==<br />
Trying to figure out the text codes and graphics situation has been an interesting challenge, but I think I'm getting the hang of it (the very basics, at least.) I just noticed that you'd replied to my query about the witan, as well. <br />
<br />
Out of personal interest, were you pretty much assured of your first choice seminary once you were accepted as a seminarian? You see, my boyfriend (we're Antiochian, too) would love to go to St. Vlad's, but every now and then he has a panic attack that he could be sent off to, say, the hinterlands of Alaska. In any case, he's planning on speaking to Bishop Basil in September when the Bishop comes to Texas, so we'll see. [[User:Gabriela|Gabriela]] 15:14, May 9, 2006 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Photos==<br />
Thank you, Father Deacon. Your point is well taken - the fine point of the Law! I'll change the attribution as you recommend. Also. in up loading the photos, I first titled the files and then uploaded them without taking in account the warning of not using an '&amp;' in the file name. I tried to figure out how to remove the offending file but couldn't. I would appreciate if you could make the correction - removing the offending file.<br />
<br />
== Image question ==<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Abouna_Matta_El_Meskeen.jpg This] looks to be the source of [[:Image:416px-Abouna_Matta_El_Meskeen.jpg]]. Would this qualify as public domain, or would it still fall under GFDL? The wikipedia language states that &quot;All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License,&quot; but fails to convince me of the status of the image there. {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:38, May 16, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Standard characters for titles ==<br />
<br />
Dn. Andrew, I remembered something about using standard characters for article titles. After poking around for a while, I found the following useful: [[Talk:Daniel the Hermit]] and [[http://www2.orthodoxwiki.org/OrthodoxWiki_talk:Style_Manual#Spelling_conventions]]. Would you mind writing something up in the [[OrthodoxWiki:Style Manual]] to address this? I tried a search for &quot;Jaaskelainen&quot; and did not get to [[Ambrose (Jääskeläinen) of Helsinki]]. If we do want to have the article titles with special characters, should we have a standard-character redirect? —[[User:Magda|&lt;b&gt;magda&lt;/b&gt;]] ([[User_talk:Magda|talk]]) 10:08, May 26, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Pilgrimage ==<br />
<br />
Deacon Andrew:<br />
<br />
It looks like I'll be attending the pilgrimage again this year (thanks be to God). I'd love to meet you.<br />
<br />
Also, I know the timing is rather late, but if you have a spare patch of floor/couch/bed where a pilgrim could take shelter Sunday night, that would be the bomb. :D No pressure; just wondering. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 14:24, May 27, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Bp. Orestes==<br />
<br />
Thanks, Dn Andrew, for the change in the title for Bp. Orestes. I was not sure of all the potential titles for Bp. Orestes which one would be correct. So, you came to my rescue again! <br />
To change the subject, I notice some time ago that on the Calendar we have an 'Edward of England', September 3 I think, but in a search of the net, I have found only an 'Edward the Martyr' or an 'Edward the Confessor'. So, we have an anomoly. which Edward is 'Edward of England'? I haven't found a third! <br />
Perhaps you and/or Magda came clear up the inconsistence. Keep up the excellent work. wsk [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 11:58, May 28, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Hermas/Hermes ==<br />
<br />
Should we have [[Apostle Hermes|Apostle Herm'''e'''s]] as a disambiguation page, to distinguish between [[Apostle Hermas|Apostle Herm'''a'''s]] and [[Apostle Hermes (bishop)|Apostle Herm'''e'''s (bishop)]]? Currently on the [[Apostles]] page it may be confusing. —[[User:Magda|&lt;b&gt;magda&lt;/b&gt;]] ([[User_talk:Magda|talk]]) 11:30, May 31, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Moving over redirs==<br />
I actually just moved the article over the existing redirect, but I selected the 'delete page first' button - perhaps that's what did it. Thanks for looking out for me :). &amp;mdash; ''[[User:Pistevo|Pι]]''[[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]]'''[[User talk:Pistevo|τ]]'''[[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]]''[[User:Pistevo|vο]]'', at 20:32, May 31, 2006 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Deletes ==<br />
<br />
Yeah.. the thing is the legitimate history was already deleted. I am thinking it would be better to restore the initial delete anyway. Let me try that out instead. I just didn't want that stuff in the article history... {{User:FrJohn/sig}}<br />
<br />
==[[Greek Orthodox Metropolis of New Zealand]]==<br />
Article was protected, I assume, because of an e-mail received by the chief secretary - perhaps you've received it? &amp;mdash; edited by [[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;Pι&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]][[User talk:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;yellow&quot;&gt;τ&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]][[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;vο&lt;/font&gt;]] at 17:38, June 6, 2006 (CDT)<br />
:Basic summary (as far as I can make out) - take down the article because it is false, until the &quot;Holy Archdiocese of New Zealand, Exarchate of Oceania&quot; (sic) gives permission for a article written by someone with the Metropolitan's blessing. A takedown hasn't occured because there's no cause for such - everything on the article is a matter of public record. &amp;mdash; edited by [[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;red&quot;&gt;Pι&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]][[User talk:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;yellow&quot;&gt;τ&lt;/font&gt;]][[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]][[User:Pistevo|&lt;font color=&quot;blue&quot;&gt;vο&lt;/font&gt;]].<br />
<br />
==Axios==<br />
<br />
Thank you, Dcn. Andrew. [[User:Vandrona|Dn. Virgil]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Byzantine_ChantByzantine Chant2006-01-20T17:59:08Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>Strictly speaking, '''Byzantine Chant''' is the sacred [[Church Music|chant]] of Christian Churches following the Orthodox rite. This tradition, encompassing the Greek-speaking world, developed in [[Eastern Roman Empire|Byzantium]] from the establishment of its capital, Constantinople, in 330 until [[Fall of Constantinople|its fall]] in 1453. It is undeniably of composite origin, drawing on the artistic and technical productions of the classical age, on [[Judaism|Jewish]] music, and inspired by the monophonic vocal music that evolved in the early Christian cities of Alexandria, Antioch and Ephesus. In the [[Orthodox Church]] today, many churches use Byzantine Chant as their primary musical tradition, including the Churches of [[Church of Constantinople|Constantinople]], [[Church of Alexandria|Alexandria]], [[Church of Antioch|Antioch]], [[Church of Jerusalem|Jerusalem]], [[Church of Romania|Romania]], [[Church of Serbia|Serbia]], [[Church of Greece|Greece]], and [[Church of Cyprus|Cyprus]].<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
<br />
===Early Christian Period===<br />
Byzantine chant manuscripts date from the Ninth century, while [[lectionary|lectionaries]] of biblical readings in [[Ekphonetic Notation]] (a primitive graphic system designed to indicate the manner of reciting lessons from Scripture) begin about a century earlier and continue in use until the twelfth or thirteenth century. Our knowledge of the older period is derived from Church service books [[Typikon|Typika]], patristic writings and medieval histories. Scattered examples of hymn texts from the early centuries of Greek Christianity still exist. Some of these employ the metrical schemes of classical Greek poetry; but the change of pronunciation had rendered those meters largely meaningless, and, except when classical forms were imitated, Byzantine hymns of the following centuries are prose-poetry, unrhymed verses of irregular length and accentual patterns. The common term for a short hymn of one stanza, or one of a series of stanzas, is [[troparion]] (this may carry the further connotation of a hymn interpolated between Psalm verses). A famous example, whose existence is attested as early as the fourth century, is the Vespers hymn, &quot;Phos Hilaron&quot; (&quot;O Gladsome Light&quot;); another, &quot;O Monogenes Yios&quot; (&quot;Only Begotten Son&quot;) ascribed to Emperor St. [[Justinian the Great]] (527-565), figures in the introductory portion of the Divine Liturgy. Perhaps the earliest set of troparia of known authorship are those of the [[monk]] Auxentios (first half of the fifth century), attested in his biography but not preserved in any later Byzantine order of service.<br />
<br />
===Medieval Period===<br />
Two concepts must be understood if we are to appreciate fully the function of music in Byzantine worship. The first, which retained currency in Greek theological and mystical speculation until the dissolution of the empire, was the belief in the [[angel]]ic transmission of sacred chant: the assumption that the early Church united men in the prayer of the angelic choirs. This notion is certainly older than the [[Apocalypse]] account ([[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] 4:8-11), for the musical function of angels as conceived in the [[Old Testament]] is brought out clearly by [[Book of Isaiah|Isaiah]] (6:1-4) and [[Book of Ezekiel|Ezekiel]] (3:12). Most significant in the fact, outlined in [[Exodus]] 25, that the pattern for the earthly worship of [[Israel]] was derived from [[Heaven]]. The allusion is perpetuated in the writings of the early [[Church Fathers]], such as [[Clement of Rome]], [[Justin Martyr|Justin]], [[Ignatius of Antioch]], [[Athenagoras of Athens]], and [[Dionysius the Areopagite]]. It receives acknowledgement later in the liturgical treatises of [[Nicolas Cabasilas]] and [[Symeon of Thessaloniki]] (''Patrologia Graeca'', CL, 368-492 and CLV, 536-699, respectively).<br />
<br />
The effect that this concept had on church music was threefold: first, it bred a highly conservative attitude to musical composition; secondly, it stabilized the melodic tradition of certain hymns; and thirdly, it continued, for a time, the anonymity of the composer. For if a chant is of heavenly origin, then the acknowledgement received by man in transmitting it to posterity ought to be minimal. This is especially true when he deals with hymns which were known to have been first sung by angelic choirs&amp;mdash;such as the [[Amen]], [[Alleluia]], [[Trisagion]], [[Sanctus]] and [[Doxology]]. Consequently, until Palaeologan times, was inconceivable for a composer to place his name beside a notated text in the manuscripts.<br />
<br />
Ideas of originality and free invention similar to those seen in later music probably never existed in early Byzantine times. The very notion of using traditional formulas (or melody-types) as a compositional technique shows an archaic concept in liturgical chant, and is quite the opposite of free, original creation. It seems evident that the chants of the Byzantine repertory found in musical manuscripts from the tenth century to the time of the [[Fourth Crusade]] (1204-1261), represent the final and only surviving stage of an evolution, the beginnings of which go back at least to the sixth century and possibly even to the chant of the [[Synagogue]]. What exact changes took place in the music during the formative stage is difficult to say; but certain chants in use even today exhibit characteristics whichmay throw light on the subject. These include recitation formulas, melody-types, and standard phrases that are clearly evident in the folk music and other traditional music of various cultures of the East, including the music of the [[Judaism|Jews]].<br />
<br />
The second, less permanent, concept was that of ''koinonia'' or &quot;communion.&quot; This was less permanent because, after the fourth century, when it was analyzed and integrated into a theological system, the bond and &quot;oneness&quot; that united the clergy and the faithful in liturgical worship was less potent. It is, however, one of the key ideas for understanding a number of realities for which we now have different names. With regard to musical performance, this concept of koinonia may be applied to the primitive use of the word choros. It referred, not to a separate group within the congregation entrusted with musical responsibilities, but to the congregation as a whole. St. [[Ignatius of Antioch]] wrote to the Church in Ephesus in the following way:<br />
<br />
:&quot;''You must every man of you join in a choir so that bring harmonious and in concord and taking the keynote of God in unison, you may sing with one voice through Jesus Christ to the Father, so that He may hear you and through your good deeds recognize that you are parts of His Son.''&quot;<br />
<br />
A marked feature of liturgical ceremony was the active part taken by the people in its performance, particularly in the recitation or chanting of hymns, responses and psalms. The terms choros, koinonia and ekklesia were used synonymously in the early Byzantine Church. In [[Psalms]] 149 and 150, the [[Septuagint]] translated the Hebrew word ''machol'' (dance) by the Greek word ''choros''. As a result, the early Church borrowed this word from classical antiquity as a designation for the congregation, at worship and in song in heaven and on earth both. Before long, however, a clericalizing tendency soon began to manifest itself in linguistic usage, particularly after the [[Council of Laodicea]], whose fifteenth Canon permitted only the canonical ''psaltai'' (&quot;chanters&quot;) to sing at the services. The word ''choros'' came to refer to the special priestly function in the liturgy - just as, architecturally speaking, the choir became a reserved area near the sanctuary - and ''choros'' eventually became the equivalent of the word ''kleros''.<br />
<br />
The development of large scale hymnographic forms begins in the fifth century with the rise of the kontakion, a long and elaborate metrical sermon, reputedly of Syriac origin, which finds its acme in the work of St. [[Romanos the Melodist]] (Sixth century). This dramatic homily, which usually paraphrases a Biblical narrative, comprises some 20 to 30 stanzas and was sung during the Morning Office ([[Orthros]]) in a simple and direct syllabic style (one note per syllable). The earliest musical versions, however, are &quot;melismatic&quot; (that is, many notes per syllable of text), and belong to the time of the ninth century and later when [[kontakion|kontakia]] were reduced to the ptooimion (introductory verse) and first oikos (stanza). In the second half of the seventh century, the [[kontakion]] was supplanted by a new type of hymn, the [[canon|kanon]], initiated by St. [[Andrew of Crete]] (ca. 660-ca. 740) and developed by Saints [[John of Damascus]] and [[Kosmas of Jerusalem]] (both eighth century). Essentially, the [[canon|kanon]] is an hymnodic complex comprised of nine odes which were originally attached to the nine [[Biblical canticles]] and to which they were related by means of corresponding poetic allusion or textual quotation.<br />
<br />
The nine canticles are:<br />
<br />
* (1)-(2) The two songs of [[Moses]] ([[Exodus]] 15:1-19 and [[Deuteronomy]] 32:1-43);<br />
* (3)-(7) The prayers of [[Hannah]], [[Habbakuk]], [[Isaiah]], [[Jonah]] and the [[Three Holy Children|Three Children]] ([[I Kingdoms|1 Samuel]] 2:1-10; [[Book of Habbakuk|Habbakuk]] 3:1-19; [[Book of Isaiah|Isaiah]] 26:9-20; [[Book of Jonah|Jonah]] 2:3-10; Apoc. [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] 3:26-56);<br />
* (8) The song of the [[Three Holy Children|Three Children]] (Apoc. [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] 3:57-88);<br />
* (9) The [[Magnificat]] and the Benedictus ([[Gospel of Luke|Luke]] 1:46-55 and 68-79).<br />
<br />
Each ode consists of an initial troparion, the [[irmos|heirmos]], followed by three, four or more [[troparion|troparia]] which are the exact metrical reproductions of the [[irmos|heirmos]], thereby allowing the same music to fit all troparia equally well.<br />
<br />
The nine heirmoi, however, are metrically dissimilar; consequently, an entire kanon comprises nine independent melodies (eight, when the second ode is omitted), which are united musically by the same mode and textually by references to the general theme of the liturgical occasion, and sometimes by an acrostic. Heirmoi in syllabic style are gathered in the Heirmologion, a bulky volume which first appeared in the middle of the tenth century and contains over a thousand model troparia arranged into an [[oktoechos]] (the eight-mode musical system).<br />
<br />
Another kind of hymn, important both for its number and for the variety of its liturgical use, is the [[sticheron]]. Festal stichera, accompanying both the fixed psalms at the beginning and end of [[Vespers]] and the psalmody of the Lauds (the [[Ainoi]]) in the Morning Office, exist for all special days of the year, the Sundays and weekdays of [[Great Lent|Lent]], and for the recurrent cycle of eight weeks in the order of the modes beginning with [[Pascha]]. Their melodies preserved in the [[Sticherarion]], are considerably more elaborate and varied than in the tradition of the [[Heirmologion]].<br />
<br />
===Later Byzantine and Post-Byzantine Periods===<br />
With the end of creative poetical composition, Byzantine chant entered its final period, devoted largely to the production of more elaborate musical settings of the traditional texts: either embellishments of the earlier simpler melodies, or original music in highly ornamental style. This was the work of the so-called Maistores, &quot;masters,&quot; of whom the most celebrated was St. [[John Koukouzeles]] (active ca. 1300), compared in Byzantine writings to St. John of Damascus himself, as an innovator in the development of chant. The multiplication of new settings and elaborations of the old continued in the centuries following the [[Fall of Constantinople]], until by the end of the eighteenth century the original musical repertory of the medieval musical manuscripts had been quite replaced by later compositions, and even the basic model system had undergone profound modification.<br />
<br />
[[Chrysanthos of Madytos]] (ca. 1770-1846), [[Gregory the Protopsaltes]], and [[Chourmouzios the Archivist]] were responsible for a much needed reform of the notation of Greek ecclesiastical music. Essentially, this work consisted of a simplification of the Byzantine musical symbols which, by the early 19th century, had become so complex and technical that only highly skilled chanters were able to interpret them correctly. Despite its numerous shortcomings the work of the three reformers is a landmark in the history of Greek Church music, since it introduced the system of neo-Byzantine music upon which are based the present-day chants of the Greek Orthodox Church.<br />
<br />
==General Information==<br />
<br />
Byzantine chant is built upon eight modes (tones), each mode with its own specific tonality. The modes change sequentially from week to week, starting the Monday after the Sunday of Thomas, with mode 1. Within Bright week itself, the mode changes each day, thus: Sunday – mode 1, Monday – mode 2, Tuesday – mode 3, Wednesday – mode 4, Thursday – mode plagal of the first (5), Friday – mode plagal of the second (6), Saturday – mode plagal of the fourth (8). <br />
<br />
The grave mode (7) was chosen as the mode to be left out due to its heavier sound, considered least appropriate for the festal period among the eight modes. Since [[Pentecost]] falls on the Sunday where the grave mode would have been used in the normal sequence, the mode is once again skipped and the hymns of Pentecost are used. The sequence resumes the following week with plagal of the fourth.<br />
<br />
In the time between a great feast and its leave-taking, for example during the week following Pentecost, the hymns of the feast are chanted rather than the hymns pertaining to the mode of the week.<br />
<br />
===The Scale===<br />
<br />
The Byzantine Chant scale consists of seven notes: </div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Talk:Belarusian_Council_of_Orthodox_Churches_in_North_AmericaTalk:Belarusian Council of Orthodox Churches in North America2005-11-30T17:20:38Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>What happened to the Belarusian Council on the GOARCH site. The page has been removed and they have been removed from the Other Patriarchal Jurisdiction list. Joe 30 Nov 2005<br />
<br />
: That's the 1000 wikipoint question. Magda and I have been trying to figure that out for a while... [[User:Vandrona|Virgil]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohnUser talk:FrJohn2005-11-30T04:38:51Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>&lt;div id=&quot;shortcut&quot; style=&quot;border: 1px solid #CC9; margin: 0em 1em 0em 1em; text-align: center; padding:5px; clear: both; background-color:#F1F1DE&quot;&gt;<br />
''Welcome to my discussion page. Please post new messages to the bottom of the page and use headings when starting new discussion topics.&lt;br&gt; Please also sign and date your entries by inserting '''&lt;nowiki&gt;- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''' at the end. Thank you.&lt;br&gt;[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit&amp;section=new}} Start a new discussion topic.]''<br />
----<br />
''[[/archived discussion 1]] (through 09-07-2005)''&lt;br&gt;<br />
''[[/archived discussion 2]] (through 11-20-2005)''<br />
&lt;/div&gt;<br />
<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
<br />
== Interwiki ==<br />
<br />
Father, would it be okay to get rid of some of [[Special:Interwiki|these]]? For instance, the [http://andstuff.org/ AndStuff] wiki is personal and closed. For many of these, it's doubtful that we would ever link them, let alone in quantities enough to justify having an interwiki link ([http://www.linuxwiki.de/ LinuxWiki], for example). On the other hand, it may be easier to keep them than weed them out. Additionally, some of the interwiki links do not link to wikis, like those related to Google. Your thoughts? {{User:Magda/sig}} 13:06, November 21, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Favicon License ==<br />
<br />
Father, That license for the favicon was for the favicon that I created. If you read the log, I think HappyGrievling replaced it with a favicon of his version. He just didn't change the license.<br />
<br />
== [[OrthodoxWiki:Buzz]] ==<br />
<br />
Father, I thought you might be interested in [http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&amp;q=orthodoxwiki this link] which I found last night. {{User:Magda/sig}} 09:23, November 24, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Link buttons ==<br />
<br />
Fr., the [http://www.flickr.com/photos/magdalainn/13560522/ first one] is link-button size, but the [http://www.flickr.com/photos/magdalainn/13445237/ second] is more banner-sized, and rather illegible when reduced to the size of the first. Still want the second? You're welcome to both, of course. {{User:Magda/sig}} 12:08, November 25, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== [[OrthodoxWiki:Photo galleries]] ==<br />
<br />
* [[:Category:Skete Images]] - For images used by permission from Skete.com - See [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Skete.com]]<br />
I have noticed that [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Skete.com]] does not include all of the images which actually use the template (cf. [[:Image:Dionysius the Areopagite.jpg]]). Also, how do you make the category page show up as a gallery? {{User:Magda/sig}} 12:56, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Press photos ==<br />
<br />
They're probably actually more in the line of &quot;fair use&quot; than public domain, something like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Promotional what you find here] or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Promophoto here], i.e., that the image was produced for mass distribution. {{User:ASDamick/sig}} 14:13, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== IRC ==<br />
<br />
Fr. I noticed that Dcn. Damick, Magda, and yourself are doing some serious work with images. I would jump in and help, but don't know where to start. Do you use Firefox for your browser? If so, have you looked at the ChatZilla IRC Client [[OrthodoxWiki:Chat|I wrote about]]. I think this would help everyone talk about what everyone else is doing at the moment and might help speed things along. This is the last time I will mention it for a while. I am currently logged into the #orthodoxwiki channel at irc.freenode.net using the default user name. Joe 18:09 EST 26 Nov 2005<br />
<br />
==Japan==<br />
<br />
Father John, I'll give it a try. [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 17:33, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== [[OrthodoxWiki:Photo galleries]] ==<br />
<br />
Father, what images do you want in [[:Category:Images of Icons|this category]]? {{User:Magda/sig}} 19:54, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
''Please import all appropriate images from a whole category at one time and then register the category on Wikimedia Commons that they were imported from here.'' — I don't think I understand this sentence. Would you please clarify? {{User:Magda/sig}} 22:06, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
Okay, so what images do you want in [[:Category:Icons|''this'' category]]? Each and every icon? Just want to make sure before going ahead. My plan is to go through [[Special:Imagelist]] tomorrow (or later today, in my time zone) and make sure they're in the lists by subject. {{User:Magda/sig}} 23:17, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:More specifically, do you want to add &lt;nowiki&gt;[[Category:Icons]]&lt;/nowiki&gt; even to the images which are already in, say, [[:Category:Skete Images]]? The Skete Images category itself is in [[:Category:Icons]], but the individual images do not show up in the [[:Category:Icons]] gallery. {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:30, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
How about images which are included in a permission category, but not a topical category—[[:Image:Alaska.png]], [[:Image:Alexandria logo.gif]]—would you want them to be in the ironic &quot;Uncategorized Images&quot; category? {{User:Magda/sig}} 16:08, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Any idea what to do about the two almost-identical Atalla Hanna pictures? I would prefer to delete the second, but am not sure how. {{User:Magda/sig}} 16:20, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
:*Atallah Hanna.jpg<br />
:*Atallah%20Hanna.jpg<br />
:That's part of what has me confused, but there is a separate listing for each on [[Special:Imagelist]] (500, by name), and when clicking on the filename, those are kept in different directories, so it's not the exact same file: [http://www2.orthodoxwiki.org/images/e/ec/Atallah_Hanna.jpg] and [http://www2.orthodoxwiki.org/images/5/51/Atallah%2520Hanna.jpg]. {{User:Magda/sig}} 18:20, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Vandalbot Template ==<br />
<br />
We can either do that, or just check the list at the admin yahoo group by searching for ''vandal''. {{User:Magda/sig}} 20:54, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== More image stuff ==<br />
<br />
[[:Category:OrthodoxWiki Images]]—<br />
It seems that some of these, such as [[:Image:Logo wikikto en.jpg]], would be better off in the [[:Category:Logos|Logos]] category. I don't see them as OrthodoxWiki logos or even system images. If you think they should remain in this category, perhaps you could add a clarifyer on the category page?<br />
<br />
[[MediaWiki:Uploadtext]]—<br />
Should we add something like: &quot;If you have obtained this image from the internet, please include the URL in the summary.&quot; ? (Or perhaps: &quot;If you have obtained this image from the internet, please include the URL in the summary, unless the source is evident from the image license.&quot;)<br />
<br />
== Re: Copyright trouble ==<br />
<br />
:Hello Father, I edit/create new entries on ''both'' sites (Wikipedia and OrthodoxWiki - see, for example, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina_Monastery_in_Mariut] and compare to OrthodoxWiki), so it's the same person in most cases, though I use different usernames in Wikipedia and usually even edit without loging in at all, i.e., a different IP address will appear at different times (my IP is not static). I started editing in Wikipedia before moving to OrthodoxWiki. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 17:31, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yes, Father. St. Mina's article [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina] is a '''complete rewrite from scratch''' by me (''cf.'' previous edits), and St. Mina Monastery article [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina_Monastery_in_Mariut] has been '''created''' and '''fully''' written/edited by me too on both sites. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 17:39, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
::http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nectarios (I created/edited this one too using username Kyrillos2 (to upload the image) and IP address 80.41.178.115)<br />
<br />
::http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraam_Bishop_of_Fayoum (I created/edited this one also using username Kyrillos2 (to upload the image) and IP addresses 80.41.178.114 and 80.41.180.161)<br />
<br />
::and many, many more...<br />
<br />
::A general problem with wikis is the lack of explicit authorship/editorship information, and of mechanisms to ensure this is clearly present in every article. (For quality benchmarking purposes an IP or nickname cannot qualify as proper authorship/editorship information.) This is a crucial quality criterion that we teach to our students - please refer to the following presentation of mine: http://healthcybermap.org/MNKB_Quality.PDF<br />
<br />
::In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 18:10, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
(also: http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/OrthodoxWiki_talk:Copyrights )<br />
<br />
:That's a nice presentation, Arbible, very clear. One clarification, though. The article in question is [[Cyril VI (Atta) of Alexandria]] (cf. [[wikipedia:Pope Cyril VI of Alexandria]]). Fr. John<br />
<br />
::http://www.zeitun-eg.net/stcyril6/<br />
::http://www.stmina-monastery.org/popekyrillos6.htm<br />
::Arbible<br />
<br />
:The WHOIS info of the above domains can be easily checked.<br />
:The following resource might also be of interest, especially the sections on self-plagiarism and on proper/improper paraphrasing: http://facpub.stjohns.edu/~roigm/plagiarism/<br />
:I need to go now - I will be in Thailand for the coming few days, God willing, to deliver an invited keynote speech at a conference http://www.j-geoinfo.net/HealthGIS/FISH_prog.htm , so won't be available to reply/edit. Please keep me in your prayers. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 19:36, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Reply==<br />
''Thanks for the links, but can you be more explicit about what you are saying they demonstrate? Thanks, [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]''<br />
<br />
::Even when one is simply importing (to a different wiki)/reusing their ''own'' articles that nobody else has edited this can still sometimes be considered self-plagiarism by academic standards (also depending on the specific details of a particular import and how you approach/judge the whole matter). '''OPEN''' wiki &quot;encyclopedias&quot; are not academically rigorous and were never intended to be so. Nicknames are not any better than IP addresses (in this respect). One can never compare Wikipedia to Britannica, for example - see [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/27/wikipedia_britannica_and_linux/], [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/18/wikipedia_quality_problem/]. Please forgive me Father; you should never describe yourself as &quot;slow sometimes&quot;. Thanks for the prayerful wishes. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 20:30, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
'''Food for thought:'''<br />
* http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/3540259953/102-7745094-9986548<br />
* I have also written a bit on the wiki concept in this recent editorial of mine: http://www.ij-healthgeographics.com/content/4/1/22 (see under 'Discussion &gt; The wikification of GIS, maps and satellite imagery/aerial photography: imaging and geospatial information for the wide masses')<br />
<br />
===RE: P.S ===<br />
''Did I ever mention that one day last year a woman showed up at my church - she had been Muslim by was converted by a miracle that she a her sister both witnessed together -- it was a manifestation of Pope St. Kyrillos? It was a beautiful story. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]'' <br />
<br />
::There are some volumes in English here: http://www.stmina-monastery.org/miracles.htm<br />
:: God Bless. --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 20:30, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Ethics==<br />
I've been using the off-line OrthodoxWiki known as the seminary for the article. I am taking a course in Orthodox Christian Ethics this semester and when we were told to come up with a project for the semester... There were three of us, writing three articles each, so hopefully, before the end of the year, there will be eight more articles for that section of OrthodoxWiki. [[User:Vandrona|Virgil]]<br />
<br />
: Actually, yes. Among the options for projects was &quot;creating ethics-related web-pages,&quot; with the provision that we would have to show they are useful for more than just getting a grade. Naturally, I suggested OrthodoxWiki. Thankfully, it was accepted. [[User:Vandrona|Virgil]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohnUser talk:FrJohn2005-11-30T02:06:11Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>&lt;div id=&quot;shortcut&quot; style=&quot;border: 1px solid #CC9; margin: 0em 1em 0em 1em; text-align: center; padding:5px; clear: both; background-color:#F1F1DE&quot;&gt;<br />
''Welcome to my discussion page. Please post new messages to the bottom of the page and use headings when starting new discussion topics.&lt;br&gt; Please also sign and date your entries by inserting '''&lt;nowiki&gt;- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''' at the end. Thank you.&lt;br&gt;[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit&amp;section=new}} Start a new discussion topic.]''<br />
----<br />
''[[/archived discussion 1]] (through 09-07-2005)''&lt;br&gt;<br />
''[[/archived discussion 2]] (through 11-20-2005)''<br />
&lt;/div&gt;<br />
<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
<br />
== Interwiki ==<br />
<br />
Father, would it be okay to get rid of some of [[Special:Interwiki|these]]? For instance, the [http://andstuff.org/ AndStuff] wiki is personal and closed. For many of these, it's doubtful that we would ever link them, let alone in quantities enough to justify having an interwiki link ([http://www.linuxwiki.de/ LinuxWiki], for example). On the other hand, it may be easier to keep them than weed them out. Additionally, some of the interwiki links do not link to wikis, like those related to Google. Your thoughts? {{User:Magda/sig}} 13:06, November 21, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Favicon License ==<br />
<br />
Father, That license for the favicon was for the favicon that I created. If you read the log, I think HappyGrievling replaced it with a favicon of his version. He just didn't change the license.<br />
<br />
== [[OrthodoxWiki:Buzz]] ==<br />
<br />
Father, I thought you might be interested in [http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&amp;q=orthodoxwiki this link] which I found last night. {{User:Magda/sig}} 09:23, November 24, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Link buttons ==<br />
<br />
Fr., the [http://www.flickr.com/photos/magdalainn/13560522/ first one] is link-button size, but the [http://www.flickr.com/photos/magdalainn/13445237/ second] is more banner-sized, and rather illegible when reduced to the size of the first. Still want the second? You're welcome to both, of course. {{User:Magda/sig}} 12:08, November 25, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== [[OrthodoxWiki:Photo galleries]] ==<br />
<br />
* [[:Category:Skete Images]] - For images used by permission from Skete.com - See [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Skete.com]]<br />
I have noticed that [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Skete.com]] does not include all of the images which actually use the template (cf. [[:Image:Dionysius the Areopagite.jpg]]). Also, how do you make the category page show up as a gallery? {{User:Magda/sig}} 12:56, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Press photos ==<br />
<br />
They're probably actually more in the line of &quot;fair use&quot; than public domain, something like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Promotional what you find here] or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Promophoto here], i.e., that the image was produced for mass distribution. {{User:ASDamick/sig}} 14:13, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== IRC ==<br />
<br />
Fr. I noticed that Dcn. Damick, Magda, and yourself are doing some serious work with images. I would jump in and help, but don't know where to start. Do you use Firefox for your browser? If so, have you looked at the ChatZilla IRC Client [[OrthodoxWiki:Chat|I wrote about]]. I think this would help everyone talk about what everyone else is doing at the moment and might help speed things along. This is the last time I will mention it for a while. I am currently logged into the #orthodoxwiki channel at irc.freenode.net using the default user name. Joe 18:09 EST 26 Nov 2005<br />
<br />
==Japan==<br />
<br />
Father John, I'll give it a try. [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 17:33, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== [[OrthodoxWiki:Photo galleries]] ==<br />
<br />
Father, what images do you want in [[:Category:Images of Icons|this category]]? {{User:Magda/sig}} 19:54, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
''Please import all appropriate images from a whole category at one time and then register the category on Wikimedia Commons that they were imported from here.'' — I don't think I understand this sentence. Would you please clarify? {{User:Magda/sig}} 22:06, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
Okay, so what images do you want in [[:Category:Icons|''this'' category]]? Each and every icon? Just want to make sure before going ahead. My plan is to go through [[Special:Imagelist]] tomorrow (or later today, in my time zone) and make sure they're in the lists by subject. {{User:Magda/sig}} 23:17, November 26, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:More specifically, do you want to add &lt;nowiki&gt;[[Category:Icons]]&lt;/nowiki&gt; even to the images which are already in, say, [[:Category:Skete Images]]? The Skete Images category itself is in [[:Category:Icons]], but the individual images do not show up in the [[:Category:Icons]] gallery. {{User:Magda/sig}} 14:30, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
How about images which are included in a permission category, but not a topical category—[[:Image:Alaska.png]], [[:Image:Alexandria logo.gif]]—would you want them to be in the ironic &quot;Uncategorized Images&quot; category? {{User:Magda/sig}} 16:08, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Any idea what to do about the two almost-identical Atalla Hanna pictures? I would prefer to delete the second, but am not sure how. {{User:Magda/sig}} 16:20, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
:*Atallah Hanna.jpg<br />
:*Atallah%20Hanna.jpg<br />
:That's part of what has me confused, but there is a separate listing for each on [[Special:Imagelist]] (500, by name), and when clicking on the filename, those are kept in different directories, so it's not the exact same file: [http://www2.orthodoxwiki.org/images/e/ec/Atallah_Hanna.jpg] and [http://www2.orthodoxwiki.org/images/5/51/Atallah%2520Hanna.jpg]. {{User:Magda/sig}} 18:20, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Vandalbot Template ==<br />
<br />
We can either do that, or just check the list at the admin yahoo group by searching for ''vandal''. {{User:Magda/sig}} 20:54, November 27, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
== More image stuff ==<br />
<br />
[[:Category:OrthodoxWiki Images]]—<br />
It seems that some of these, such as [[:Image:Logo wikikto en.jpg]], would be better off in the [[:Category:Logos|Logos]] category. I don't see them as OrthodoxWiki logos or even system images. If you think they should remain in this category, perhaps you could add a clarifyer on the category page?<br />
<br />
[[MediaWiki:Uploadtext]]—<br />
Should we add something like: &quot;If you have obtained this image from the internet, please include the URL in the summary.&quot; ? (Or perhaps: &quot;If you have obtained this image from the internet, please include the URL in the summary, unless the source is evident from the image license.&quot;)<br />
<br />
== Re: Copyright trouble ==<br />
<br />
:Hello Father, I edit/create new entries on ''both'' sites (Wikipedia and OrthodoxWiki - see, for example, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina_Monastery_in_Mariut] and compare to OrthodoxWiki), so it's the same person in most cases, though I use different usernames in Wikipedia and usually even edit without loging in at all, i.e., a different IP address will appear at different times (my IP is not static). I started editing in Wikipedia before moving to OrthodoxWiki. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 17:31, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yes, Father. St. Mina's article [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina] is a '''complete rewrite from scratch''' by me (''cf.'' previous edits), and St. Mina Monastery article [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Mina_Monastery_in_Mariut] has been '''created''' and '''fully''' written/edited by me too on both sites. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 17:39, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
::http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nectarios (I created/edited this one too using username Kyrillos2 (to upload the image) and IP address 80.41.178.115)<br />
<br />
::http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraam_Bishop_of_Fayoum (I created/edited this one also using username Kyrillos2 (to upload the image) and IP addresses 80.41.178.114 and 80.41.180.161)<br />
<br />
::and many, many more...<br />
<br />
::A general problem with wikis is the lack of explicit authorship/editorship information, and of mechanisms to ensure this is clearly present in every article. (For quality benchmarking purposes an IP or nickname cannot qualify as proper authorship/editorship information.) This is a crucial quality criterion that we teach to our students - please refer to the following presentation of mine: http://healthcybermap.org/MNKB_Quality.PDF<br />
<br />
::In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 18:10, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
(also: http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/OrthodoxWiki_talk:Copyrights )<br />
<br />
:That's a nice presentation, Arbible, very clear. One clarification, though. The article in question is [[Cyril VI (Atta) of Alexandria]] (cf. [[wikipedia:Pope Cyril VI of Alexandria]]). Fr. John<br />
<br />
::http://www.zeitun-eg.net/stcyril6/<br />
::http://www.stmina-monastery.org/popekyrillos6.htm<br />
::Arbible<br />
<br />
:The WHOIS info of the above domains can be easily checked.<br />
:The following resource might also be of interest, especially the sections on self-plagiarism and on proper/improper paraphrasing: http://facpub.stjohns.edu/~roigm/plagiarism/<br />
:I need to go now - I will be in Thailand for the coming few days, God willing, to deliver an invited keynote speech at a conference http://www.j-geoinfo.net/HealthGIS/FISH_prog.htm , so won't be available to reply/edit. Please keep me in your prayers. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 19:36, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Reply==<br />
''Thanks for the links, but can you be more explicit about what you are saying they demonstrate? Thanks, [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]''<br />
<br />
::Even when one is simply importing (to a different wiki)/reusing their ''own'' articles that nobody else has edited this can still sometimes be considered self-plagiarism by academic standards (also depending on the specific details of a particular import and how you approach/judge the whole matter). '''OPEN''' wiki &quot;encyclopedias&quot; are not academically rigorous and were never intended to be so. Nicknames are not any better than IP addresses (in this respect). One can never compare Wikipedia to Britannica, for example - see [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/27/wikipedia_britannica_and_linux/], [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/18/wikipedia_quality_problem/]. Please forgive me Father; you should never describe yourself as &quot;slow sometimes&quot;. Thanks for the prayerful wishes. In Christ, --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 20:30, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
'''Food for thought:'''<br />
* http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/3540259953/102-7745094-9986548<br />
* I have also written a bit on the wiki concept in this recent editorial of mine: http://www.ij-healthgeographics.com/content/4/1/22 (see under 'Discussion &gt; The wikification of GIS, maps and satellite imagery/aerial photography: imaging and geospatial information for the wide masses')<br />
<br />
===RE: P.S ===<br />
''Did I ever mention that one day last year a woman showed up at my church - she had been Muslim by was converted by a miracle that she a her sister both witnessed together -- it was a manifestation of Pope St. Kyrillos? It was a beautiful story. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]'' <br />
<br />
::There are some volumes in English here: http://www.stmina-monastery.org/miracles.htm<br />
:: God Bless. --[[User:Arbible|Arbible]] 20:30, November 28, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Ethics==<br />
I've been using the off-line OrthodoxWiki known as the seminary for the article. I am taking a course in Orthodox Christian Ethics this semester and when we were told to come up with a project for the semester... There were three of us, writing three articles each, so hopefully, before the end of the year, there will be eight more articles for that section of OrthodoxWiki. [[User:Vandrona|Virgil]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/EthicsEthics2005-11-30T01:38:06Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>Ethics is the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation (Merriam Webster). <br />
<br />
Ethics as a separate discipline cannot be distinguished in the tradition of the Church. In recent times, however, the dialogue between Orthodoxy and the modern world has led to several works on ethics by Orthodox theologians such as Fr. Stanley Harakas, Georgios Mantzarides, Christos Yannaras, and Vigen Guroian. They approach Orthodox ethics from the perspective that ethical issues are addressed throughout the life of the Church. [[Scripture]], [[worship]], patristic writings, and [[Canon Law|canon law]] are examples of loci of ethical teaching in the life of the Orthodox Church. <br />
<br />
The Orthodox approach to ethics is [[Soteriology|soteriological]], i.e., ethics is understood from the perspective that salvation is the ultimate goal of man. Since in the Orthodox understanding salvation is intrinsically connected with [[Christology]] and the doctrine of the [[Trinity]], the starting point of an Orthodox approach to ethics is the Trinitarian God. It is in God and in the relationships among the persons of the Holy Trinity that we find our goals as human beings, as individual human beings and members of a community, e.g., family, church, society.<br />
<br />
Just as Orthodox [[anthropology]] defines man in terms of relationships (with God, with other human beings, with the rest of creation), Orthodox ethics takes place in the context of relationships within a community. Since the 'model community' is that of the Holy Trinity and relationships within the Trinity are determined by the divine Love, the ultimate ethical norm in Orthodoxy is love. Love as an ethical norm finds satisfactory rationale only within the framework of the Christian faith and the experience of the Holy Trinity. The love that we express in our relationships and which forms the basis of our ethical judgment is a limited expression, due to our limitations as created beings, of Trinitarian love.<br />
<br />
The expression of love in our daily lives forms the moral life and the ethics of the Orthodox faithful. Once again, this moral life is based on anthropology and soteriology: for the Orthodox, moral life is growth in the likeness of God; the transfiguration of our life known as theosis. Part of this transfiguration is, according to Fr. Stanley Harakas, the doing of good, being moral and developing a stable character. Thus, moral life is at the same time a struggle against evil, sin, and fallenness and an active effort towards the good. <br />
<br />
==Ethics in Scripture==<br />
<br />
A representative example of Scriptural ethical teaching is [[Apostle_Matthew|Matthew]] 5:38,39: &quot;You have heard that it was said, &quot;Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.&quot; The evaluation of this statement in the context of Orthodox ethics is once again done from a soteriological perspective. The truth of Christ's statement can be seen in the popular experience that violence begets more violence. Therefore, the statement constitutes a ground rule for our behavior. However, if turning the other cheek is detrimental to the other's salvation (e.g., by reinforcing a pattern of violence) then it may not be the appropriate course of action. Other common scriptural sources of ethical teaching include the Decalogue and the Sermon on the Mount.<br />
<br />
==Ethics in the [[Sacraments]]==<br />
<br />
The primary locus of transfiguration in the Orthodox Church is the [[Liturgy]]. It is in the Liturgy that we come to the fullest experience of God. [[Gregory_Palamas|St. Gregory]] Palamas affirmed that knowledge of God is intrinsically moral and transformational. One &quot;cannot experience God in purity, unless one purify oneself through virtue&quot; (St. Gregory Palamas, Triads) We also see in the content of the liturgical petitions and priestly prayers certain ethical precepts, such as peace, charity, and forgiveness. The anaphora of [[Basil_the_Great|St. Basil]] also shows us a number of ethical precepts which should guide our lives.: &quot;Remember, Lord, those living in chastity and godliness, in asceticism and holiness of life. [...] preserve their marriages in peace and harmony; nurture the infants; instruct the youth; strengthen the aged; give courage to the faint hearted; reunite those separated. [...] defend the widows; protect the orphans; liberate the captives; heal the sick.&quot;<br />
<br />
The Liturgy, however, is not the only locus of ethical instruction among the services. In [[baptism]] we reject Satan and place ourselves on God's side. The prayers indicate that a life in Christ is expected to have an ethical dimension (&quot;that s/he may walk in the paths of your commandments&quot;). In the [[marriage]] service, the prayers mention giving to those in need mutual obedience. Similar examples can be drawn from other sacraments and services.<br />
<br />
==Ethics in Patristic Writings==<br />
<br />
Patristic examples of ethical exhortations abound. [[John_Chrysostom|St. John]] Chrysostom concludes most of his homilies with such considerations. For example, Homily 22 on the [[Gospel]] of [[Apostle_John|St. John]] says &quot;it is impossible, though we perform ten thousand other good deeds, to enter the portals of the Kingdom without alms-doing.&quot; In Homily 60 he concludes, &quot;Considering all these things, and how much good we shall work both to those within the prison, and to ourselves, by being continually mixed up with them, let us there spend the time we used to spend in the market-place.&quot; St. Basil, in his Letter 42, to Chilo, his disciple, gives this advice: &quot;Among all, with whom you come in contact, be in all things a giver of no offence, cheerful, 'loving as a brother,' pleasant, humble-minded, never missing the mark of hospitality through extravagance of meats, but always content with what is at hand.&quot; These are only examples of the teachings which can be found in the writings of the saints, both in the early years of the Church and in our times.<br />
<br />
==Ethics in Canon Law==<br />
<br />
Canon law also shows a number of examples for clergy and laity alike. The apostolic canon number 27 says, &quot;If a bishop, presbyter, or deacon shall strike any of the faithful who have sinned, or of the unbelievers who have done wrong, with the intention of frightening them, we command that he be deposed. For our Lord has by no means taught us to do so, but, on the contrary, when he was smitten he smote not again, when he was reviled he reviled not again, when he suffered he threatened not.&quot; Canons 42 and 43 show that the expectations made of the clergy are not different from those of the laity. Thus, canon 42 reads: &quot;If a bishop or presbyter, or deacon, is addicted to dice or drinking, let him either give it over, or be deposed.&quot; This is followed immediately by, &quot;If a subdeacon, reader, or singer, commits the same things, let him either give over, or be excommunicated. So also laymen.&quot; Many other indications about the Christian way of life can be found in the canons of the Church.<br />
<br />
==Other Sources of Ethics==<br />
<br />
There are several other considerations in the development of ethics from an Orthodox perspective. The first such consideration is the person of [[Christ]]. As our hymnology indicates, Jesus Christ is perfect God and perfect man. As we believe that the perfection of man is reached only in communion with God, we strive towards that union. This is imitating Christ in the fullest understanding of the term. It is not an outward mimicry of Christ's actions, but a life of union with Christ in Spirit, prayer and the Eucharist. Only in striving for such a union can we begin to trust our ethical decisions.<br />
<br />
It should be noted that union with Christ is achieved in and through the Spirit. It is the [[Holy Spirit]] Who guides the Church into the fullness of truth and it is, therefore, the Holy Spirit Who should guide our ethical decisions. That, however, can only take place if the focus of our lives is, as [[Seraphim_of_Sarov|St. Seraphim]] of Sarov stated, the acquisition of the Holy Spirit. In practical terms, we can take our inspiration from those who have acquired the Holy Spirit: the saints of the Church. Their lives, teachings, and sayings can be valuable ethical guidelines for today's world. In doing so, we must remember that each saint had a particular path to holiness and that the life, teachings, and sayings of each saint fit the particularities of the saint's time and place. Therefore, not every teaching of a saint may hold universal validity. However, the principles embodied in the lives of the saints (e.g., dedication to Christ and love of neighbor) are the same principles that we need to embody in our own lives in order to live a life in Christ and acquire the Holy Spirit.<br />
<br />
In the Orthodox Church, life is viewed as a continuous process of becoming closer to God. There is, therefore, a process of growth in the ethical aspect of life, as well. The importance of defining ethics/moral life in relation to life in Christ and the likeness of God is shown in those instances where the moral tradition does not provide clear responses. In particular, bioethics and medical technology, which brought about beginning- and end-of-life issues do not have ready-made responses in the Orthodox tradition. However, a life in Christ and knowledge of the tradition can direct us to genuine solutions which reflect the Orthodox understanding of creation and its relationship to the Creator.<br />
<br />
Fr. Harakas points out that achieving a moral life requires will, self-determination, and commitment and that there are many means which work together towards the achievement of a moral life. They include at least the following: prayer, study, having a father confessor, knowledge of Scripture and Holy Tradition, theology, love, worship, obedience, sacraments, mission outreach, philanthropy, and social concern. Each one of these elements cannot be taken individually. Rather, each relates to the other elements in the list. In the end, the realm of ethics from an Orthodox perspective cannot be separated from the general life in Christ which we are called to live.<br />
<br />
<br />
==Articles on ethical issues==<br />
*[[Abortion]]<br />
*[[Anti-depressants]]<br />
*[[Asceticism]]<br />
*[[Assisted reproduction]]<br />
*[[Assisted suicide]]<br />
*[[Burial practices]]<br />
*[[Business ethics]]<br />
*[[Capital punishment]]<br />
*[[Chimeras]]<br />
*[[Circumcision]]<br />
*[[Cloning]]<br />
*[[Contraception]]<br />
*[[Cryogenics]]<br />
*[[Embryo adoption]]<br />
*[[Environmental ethics]]<br />
*[[Euthanasia]]<br />
*[[Genetic engineering]]<br />
*[[Homosexuality]]<br />
*[[Just war]]<br />
*[[Life support]]<br />
*[[Marriage]]<br />
*[[Natural family planning]]<br />
*[[Organ donation]]<br />
*[[Pain medication]]<br />
*[[Political ethics]]<br />
*[[Population control]]<br />
*[[Recreational drug use]]<br />
*[[Sex]]<br />
*[[Stem cell research]]<br />
*[[Surrogacy]]<br />
*[[Tattoos]]<br />
*[[Torture]]<br />
*[[Usury]]<br />
<br />
==Books on Orthodox Ethics==<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bioethics]]<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/OrthodoxWiki_talk:RoadmapOrthodoxWiki talk:Roadmap2005-11-23T21:24:53Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>I wonder if, within the resources that we have, we could have an attempt to keep the information in the various localized wikis relatively synchronized (i.e., provide the same information in all languages). I would be happy to translate articles from the English version into Romanian or viceversa (if there is ever a Romanian section). [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 14:31, November 23, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:This is great Vandrona. The heads of the localized wikis (along with any bilingual helpers) will be responsible for deciding what gets imported between wikis. Of course, priorities will have to be set -- I don't anticipate that everything would get translated.<br />
<br />
:I plan to publish some information at [[OrthodoxWiki:Localization]] later today that will begin to specify how these relationships between OrthodoxWiki-localizations should be managed. If you might be interesting in beginning or overseeing a Romanian version of OrthodoxWiki, let me know. OrthodoxWiki could provide the hosting and maintain a separate installation of MediaWiki for you.<br />
<br />
:[[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
<br />
::Everything may not be translated; it very much depends on the resources available. My thought was that it would be nice to have the same calendar, information on monasteries, saints as a starting point.<br />
<br />
::I haven't thought about a Romanian version, but I am sure Magda will be happy to help me think about it :) [[User:Vandrona|Virgil]] P.S. I forgot that four tildes use the username by default...</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/User:VandronaUser:Vandrona2005-11-23T20:54:11Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>My name is Virgil Petrişor Andronache. I am in my second year of studies at [[Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology (Brookline, Massachusetts)|Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology]]. My presence on orthodoxwiki is the work of my lovely wife, [[User:Magda|Magda]].<br />
<br />
For the 2005-2006 academic year, I am serving serve as a chant group leader, the secretary for the class of 2007, and treasurer for the Married Student Association.<br />
<br />
I was born in Bacau, Romania, in 1977, but I have been in the U.S. for ten years. My life before the [[seminary]] involved most recently playing with robots at the University of Notre Dame [http://www.nd.edu/~airolab Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Lab]. <br />
<br />
Despite my wife's assertions, I am not that tall and not nearly that invulnerable.<br />
<br />
I have a [http://vandrona.blogspot.com personal blog] for general thoughts and a [http://vandrona.xwiki.com personal wiki] for class notes.<br />
<br />
My patron [[saint]] is &quot;tied to&quot; my middle name: St. [[Apostle Peter|Peter]] on [[June 29]].</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/OrthodoxWiki_talk:RoadmapOrthodoxWiki talk:Roadmap2005-11-23T20:31:52Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>I wonder if, within the resources that we have, we could have an attempt to keep the information in the various localized wikis relatively synchronized (i.e., provide the same information in all languages). I would be happy to translate articles from the English version into Romanian or viceversa (if there is ever a Romanian section). [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]] 14:31, November 23, 2005 (CST)</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/OrthodoxWiki_talk:Logo_SubmissionsOrthodoxWiki talk:Logo Submissions2005-11-16T03:14:40Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>Note: Previous discussion has been [[/archive|archived]]<br />
<br />
=== Late Submissions ===<br />
<br />
Hey. I think I'm still going to submit one today. I thought submissions were due today. I guess this will probably affect any votes I would receive because I know some have already voted. Can I still submit? {{User:Joe Rodgers/sig}} 14:40, November 15, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
===Please voice your opinions or cast your votes about the logos!===<br />
<br />
Which one is your favorite and why?<br />
<br />
Do you have ideas for logos you don't have the technical know-how to create?<br />
&lt;br&gt;etc.<br />
<br />
==Opinions==<br />
At some point, could there be a no-more-submissions-please-vote kinda thing? Perhaps people aren't voting because they may think something better will come along soon... -- [[User:Pistevo|oea]] 19:46, 23 Oct 2005 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Hi oea, I think that's a good idea. Already, I've put up a note that submissions will stay open through Nov. 13th. I don't think we'll go much beyond that. The deadline will prob. be soon after that. I'll prominently announce it once it gets closer to the date, then we'll have some time to decide together. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
<br />
== Votes ==<br />
<br />
Since I'm going to be away at the close of submissions (and probably the close of voting), I submit my vote as the first logo by HappyGrevling (world, with cross superimposed, with scroll around it); with big thumbs up to his other two. -- [[User:Pistevo|oea]] 00:23, 31 October 2005 (CST)<br />
:Sorry for fuzziness - the vote went to ScrollLogo, &quot;big thumbs up&quot; referred to SealLogo1 and 2. -- [[User:Pistevo|oea]] 00:09, 3 November 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
Gotcha, thanks Pistevo! [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]]<br />
<br />
HappyGrevling has submitted a potential winner, I think - I mean his most recent one, with the cross lying diagonally . My vote goes to this one. - [[User:Guldfisken|Guldfisken]] 11:12, 3 November 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
I think I like the simplicity of the first one by [[User:Baker|Baker]]. (I'm attempting to put everyone's votes visually together [[User:Magda/Logo votes|here]]; please let me know if I get something wrong. {{User:Magda/sig}} 07:54, November 15, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
OK, I know it's probably lame to vote for my own logo, but hey, that's why I designed it the way I did -- because I like it! My vote goes to the Silver Cross logo (my 5th submission), with the gold-cross-world logo and the first Seal logo tied for second. - [[User:HappyGrevling|Happy Grevling]]<br />
<br />
I vote for HappyGrevling's logo #1. I like it becuase it is 3-D and is dynamic. --Tanyechka<br />
<br />
My vote is for HappyGrevling's 3rd logo. [[User:Joffridus|Joffridus]] 12:47, November 15, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Votes:Danny ===<br />
Although I would like to vote for my own logos, It would be a waste of a contest if the nicest looking one(s) were't accepted. Don't get me wrong, they are all nice, but I would have to go with HappyGrevling's one (the slanted 3d cross with 'www.OrthodoxWiki.org' over it in a curve style. I'd just have to go with that one. God Bless Everyone -- [[User:Danny]] 00:23, 15 November 2005<br />
<br />
=== Votes:Constantine ===<br />
I like Baker 1 and 2 and also BeHappyGrevling 2,3 and 4. My personal preference is Baker 2, but I vote for BeHappyGrevling 3. [[User:Constantine]] 16:23 Bulgarian Time, 15 November 2005<br />
<br />
:''I'm very happy that we have so many great logos to choose from. We'll close the submissions formally at midnight, but it's great if people's votes keep rolling in before that. [[User:FrJohn|Fr. John]] 10:41, November 15, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
=== Votes:Katjuscha ===<br />
I think my #1 vote would go to [[User:HappyGrevling]] #3 - it looks very professional, and it has the internet address integrated into it. I also like [[User:HappyGrevling]] #1, #2, and #5, [[User:Rublevpupil]] #2, and [[User:Raphael]] #2. [[User:Katjuscha|Katjuscha]] 17:06, November 15, 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
=== Vote:Vandrona ===<br />
<br />
I think I'd go for HappyGrevling 5 [[User:Vandrona|Vandrona]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/DiakonissaDiakonissa2005-11-01T21:48:18Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''''Diakonissa''''' is a Greek title of honor that is used to refer to a [[deacon|deacon's]] wife. It is derived from ''diakonos''&amp;mdash;the Greek word for ''deacon'' (literally, &quot;server&quot;). There does not currently seem to be any standard English equivalent, so most English-speaking Orthodox Christians will use the title most common in the old country churches from which their local family or parish finds its origin.<br />
<br />
''Diakonissa'' was also the term used in the ancient Church for the order of deaconess, a non-[[clergy|clerical]] order which saw to the care of women in the community.<br />
<br />
==Other languages==<br />
In Arabic, a deacon's wife is called ''Shamassy'' (derived from ''Shamas'', Arabic for &quot;deacon&quot;). Romanian uses a derivative from the Greek term, ''diaconiţă''. The Slavic tradition generally uses the same word for deacon's wife that is used for a [[presbytera|priest's wife]]: ''Matushka'' (Russian), ''Papadija'' (Serbian), ''Panimatushka'' (Ukrainian), etc.<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[Presbytera]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Church Life]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Talk:DiakonissaTalk:Diakonissa2005-11-01T21:46:39Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Romanian==<br />
Is there a Romanian equivalent to Diakonissa? -- [[User:Pistevo|oea]] 14:53, 1 November 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
: Perhaps our [[User:Vandrona|resident Romanian expert]] may be able to help? {{User:ASDamick/sig}} 15:23, 1 November 2005 (CST)<br />
<br />
:: I haven't been very 'resident' lately. I will try to put things in, though. I hope the Romanian characters show</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/ApostolosApostolos2005-08-06T23:38:00Z<p>Vandrona: note on epistles (2)</p>
<hr />
<div>An '''apostolos''' or '''epistle''' is a writing directed or sent to a person or group of persons, usually a letter and a very formal, often didactic and elegant one. The letters from [[Apostles]] to Christians in the [[New Testament]] are often referred to as epistles.<br />
<br />
In the context of the [[Divine Liturgy]] or other liturgical service, ''epistle'' may refer more specifically to a particular passage from a New Testament epistle that is scheduled to be read on a certain day or at a certain occasion, and the ''Apostolos'' is the liturgical book containing the various epistle readings as they appointed by the [[lectionary]].<br />
<br />
== [[Apostle Paul|Pauline]] Epistles ==<br />
*[[Book of Romans|The Epistle of Paul to the Romans]]<br />
*[[I Corinthians|The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians]]<br />
*[[II Corinthians|The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians]]<br />
*[[Galatians|The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians]]<br />
*[[Ephesians|The Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians]]<br />
*[[Philippians|The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians]]<br />
*[[Colossians|The Epistle of Paul to the Colossians]]<br />
*[[I Thessalonians|The First Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians]]<br />
*[[II Thessalonians|The Second Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians]]<br />
*[[I Timothy|The First Epistle of Paul to Timothy]]<br />
*[[II Timothy|The Second Epistle of Paul to Timothy]]<br />
*[[Book of Titus|The Epistle of Paul to Titus]]<br />
*[[Book of Philemon|The Epistle of Paul to Philemon]]<br />
*[[Book of Hebrews|The Epistle to the Hebrews]]&lt;sup&gt;[[#Notes|1]]&lt;/sup&gt;<br />
<br />
== General Epistles ==<br />
<br />
*[[Book of James|The General Epistle of James]]<br />
*[[I Peter|The First Epistle of Peter]]<br />
*[[II Peter|The Second Epistle of Peter]]<br />
*[[I John|The First Epistle of John]]<br />
*[[II John|The Second Epistle of John]]<br />
*[[III John|The Third Epistle of John]]<br />
*[[Book of Jude|The Epistle of Jude]]<br />
<br />
== Apocalyptic Epistle ==<br />
*[[Book of Revelation|The Book of Revelation]] (or The Apocalypse of [[Apostle John|John]])<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Gospels]]<br />
*[[Holy Scripture]]<br />
<br />
== Notes ==<br />
&amp;sup1; See note on the [[Apostle Paul]] page with regard to authorship of the epistles.<br />
<br />
[[Category:Scripture]]<br />
[[Category:Texts]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Apostle_PaulApostle Paul2005-08-06T23:22:52Z<p>Vandrona: note on epistles</p>
<hr />
<div>The holy, glorious, all-laudable '''Apostle Paul''' was not one of the Twelve [[Apostles]], but became an apostle after the [[Ascension]] of [[Jesus Christ]], being converted by him directly while on the road to Damascus. The Church remembers St. Paul on [[June 29]].<br />
<br />
== Life ==<br />
St. Paul was born in Tarsus of the tribe of Benjamin and was given the name Saul. He, like the [[Apostle Barnabas]], studied under Gamaliel. He was a Pharisee and percecutor of Christians. Miraculously converted to the True Faith by [[Jesus]] Himself on the road to Damascus, St. Paul was named and numbered among the [[Apostles]]. After his baptism by the [[Apostle Ananias]], St. Paul preached the [[Gospel]] from Arabia to Spain and to both Jews and Gentiles. He was called the &quot;Apostle to the Gentiles.&quot; Paul spent his new life in suffering and labor for Christ, establishing and organzing churches everywhere. He reached such a state of perfection that he was able to say to the Church at Galatia: ''not I, but Christ lives in me'' ([[Galatians]] 2:20).<br />
<br />
St. Paul was martyred with the [[Apostle Peter]] under [[Nero]] by beheading. <br />
<br />
== Letters ==<br />
The Church has canonized several of his [[epistle]]s to the churches, including:<br />
*[[Romans]]<br />
*[[I Corinthians|I]] &amp; [[II Corinithians|II]] Corinthians<br />
*[[Galatians]]<br />
*[[Ephesians]]<br />
*[[Philippians]]<br />
*[[Colossians]]<br />
*[[I Thessalonians|I]] &amp; [[II Thessalonians|II]] Thessalonians<br />
*[[I Timothy|I]] &amp; [[II Timothy|II]] Timothy<br />
*[[Titus]]<br />
*[[Philemon]]<br />
*[[Hebrews]]<br />
<br />
Modern scholarship has contested the authenticity of several of these letters. Hebrews in particular, whose authorship was disputed even in the early church, was most likely not written by St. Paul. However, the Church lectionary introduces readings from each of these epistles as &quot;from the epistle of St. Paul to...&quot;<br />
<br />
== Source ==<br />
*St. [[Nikolai Velimirovic]], ''The [[Prologue of Ohrid]]''<br />
<br />
[[Category:Biblical Saints]]<br />
[[Category:Martyrs]]<br />
[[Category:Saints]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Holy_Cross_Greek_Orthodox_School_of_Theology_(Brookline,_Massachusetts)Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology (Brookline, Massachusetts)2005-07-30T00:15:15Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{orthodoxyinamerica}}<br />
The '''Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology''' is an Orthodox Christian [[seminary]] located in Brookline, Massachusetts. It is closely affiliated with [[Hellenic College (Brookline, Massachusetts)|Hellenic College]], an undergraduate institution which is located on the same campus.<br />
<br />
The institution was originally founded as '''Holy Cross Theological School''' in 1937 in Pomfret, Connecticut. In 1946 the school was moved to Brookline, Massachusetts. In 1966, Holy Cross expanded its collegiate division into a full four-year liberal arts college, a distinct undergraduate institution known as Hellenic College. Holy Cross offers graduate programs of study leading to the degrees of Master of Divinity (M.Div.), Master of Theological Studies (M.T.S.), and Master of Theology (Th.M.). Holy Cross has developed into an accredited graduate school of theology, and as such has become one of the most important institutions of the [[Orthodox Church]] in the Western hemisphere.<br />
<br />
Holy Cross is an institution of the [[Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America]], and the current president is the Rev. Fr. Nicholas C. Triantafilou.<br />
<br />
==Faculty==<br />
<br />
*Rev. Dr. Emmanuel Clapsis: Dean of Holy Cross. Fields of Interest: Dogmatic Theology, Contemporary Christian theologies, Ecumenical Theology, Christian responses to postmodern cultural realities. <br />
<br />
*V. Rev. Dr. Joachim Costonis: Director of Archbishop Iakovos Library and Learning Resource Center. Fields of Expertise: liturgical arts, manuscript illumination, religious iconography of Byzantine lead seals, and Christian iconography.<br />
<br />
*Rev. Dr. George Dion [[George_Dragas|Dragas]]<br />
<br />
*Rev. Dr. Thomas Fitzgerald. Fields of Interest: Church History and Historical Theology.<br />
<br />
*Mr. Photios Ketzetzis. Field of Expertise: Byzantine Music.<br />
<br />
*Dr. Philip Mamalakis. Field of Interest: Pastoral Theology.<br />
<br />
*Dr Lewis Patsavos. Fields of Interest: Canonical Tradition and Field Education.<br />
<br />
*Dr. James C. Skedros. Field of Interest: Church History.<br />
<br />
*Rev. Dr. Theodore Stylianopoulos. Fields of Interest: New Testament, especially Matthew, John, and Paul. Hermeneutics and Patristic Exegesis. Orthodox Theology and Spirituality. Jewish-Christian Relations.<br />
<br />
*Dr. Evie Zachariades-Holmberg. Professor of Classics and Ecclesiastical Greek.<br />
<br />
*Rev. Dr. Eugen J. Pentiuc. Fields of Interest: Old Testament, Hebrew.<br />
<br />
*Rev. Nifon Abraham<br />
<br />
*Dr. George Bebis<br />
<br />
*Rev Nicholas M. Kastanas - Byzantine Music.<br />
<br />
*Very Rev. Gerasimos Makris - Teleturgics.<br />
<br />
*Rev. Dr. Frank Marangos - Religious Education<br />
<br />
*Mr. Richard Vanderhoef - Music<br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
* [http://holycross.hchc.edu/ Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology] (official site)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Seminaries]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/Template:July_29Template:July 292005-07-29T14:30:01Z<p>Vandrona: added a couple of saints from goarch.org.</p>
<hr />
<div>&lt;div style=&quot;float:right;margin-left:1em&quot;&gt;<br />
[[Image:Olaf of Norway.jpg|100px|St. Olaf of Norway]]<br />
&lt;/div&gt;[[Martyr]] Kallinikos of Asia Minor; Martyr Theodote and her Children; [[Saint]] Constantine, [[Patriarch]] of Constantinople; Saint [[Theodosius the New]], emperor; Saint [[Roman of Kirzhach|Roman]], [[abbot]] of Kirzhach, [[disciple]] of Saint [[Sergius of Radonezh]]; Saints Constantine and Cosmas, abbots of Kosinsk, Pskov; Martyr Eustace of Mtskhet in Georgia; Martyr Michael; Saint Lupus the Confessor, [[Bishop]] of Troyes; Martyrs Mamas and Vasilicos the Elder in Darii; Saint Bogolep, Schemamonk-child of Black Ravine near Astrakhan; Saint [[Olaf of Norway|Olaf]], [[Enlightener]] of Norway; Martyr Basiliscus the Elder; Martyrs Benjamin and Berius of Constantinople; Martyr Bessarion, Bishop of Smolyan; Saint Sulian, Abbot of Luxulyan, Cornwall; Anatolios the Younger of Optina (see also [[November 12]], [[July 30]]); Martyr John the soldier at Constantinople (see also [[July 30]]); Martyrs Simplicios, Faustinos, and Beatrice, of Rome; [[Virgin-martyr]] Seraphima of Antioch</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/PanteleimonPanteleimon2005-07-27T19:55:34Z<p>Vandrona: added relic location</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Panteleimon.jpg|right|frame|St. Panteleimon]]<br />
[[Greatmartyr]] '''Panteleimon''' the [[Unmercenary]] Healer was [[martyr]]ed under the reign of Emperor Maximian (ca. 305 A.D.). His [[feast day]] is celebrated on [[July 27]].<br />
<br />
==Life==<br />
<br />
His parents were Eustorgius, a pagan, and Saint Eubula ([[March 30]]). They named him ''Pantaleon'' which means ''In all things like a lion,'' but when he [[conversion|converted]] to Christianity, he changed his name to ''Panteleimon'' which means ''All-merciful.'' He learned about Christianity from the [[priest]] who later [[baptism|baptized]] him, Saint Hermolaus. Hermolaus was living with two other priests, Hermippus and Hermocrates; the three were &quot;survivors of the massacre of 20,000 Christians in 303 ([[December 28]])&quot;. [http://ocafs.oca.org/FeastSaintsViewer.asp?SID=4&amp;ID=1&amp;FSID=102099]<br />
<br />
St. Panteleimon had been educated as a physician, and he &quot;dedicated his life to the suffering, the sick, the unfortunate and the needy. He treated all those who turned to him without charge, healing them in the name of Jesus Christ. He visited those held captive in prison. These were usually Christians, and he healed them of their wounds. In a short time, reports of the charitable physician spread throughout the city. Forsaking the other doctors, the inhabitants began to turn only to St. Panteleimon.&quot; [http://ocafs.oca.org/FeastSaintsViewer.asp?SID=4&amp;ID=1&amp;FSID=102099]<br />
<br />
Other physicians brought his case before the Emperor Maximian. St. Panteleimon confessed to being a Christian, and refused to offer sacrifice to the state gods.<br />
<br />
:&quot;[He] suggested that a sick person, for whom the doctors held out no hope, should be brought before the emperor. Then the doctors could invoke their gods, and Panteleimon would pray to his God to heal the man. A man paralyzed for many years was brought in, and pagan priests who knew the art of medicine invoked their gods without success. Then, before the very eyes of the emperor, the saint healed the paralytic by calling on the name of Jesus Christ. The ferocious Maximian executed the healed man, and gave St. Panteleimon over to fierce torture.&quot; [http://ocafs.oca.org/FeastSaintsViewer.asp?SID=4&amp;ID=1&amp;FSID=102099]<br />
<br />
Hermolaus, Hermippus, and Hermocrates were brought forth; they confessed and were beheaded. Throughout the many tortures, St. Panteleimon remained untouched. Enraged, Maximian ordered that St. Panteleimon be beheaded. The soldiers took him to an olive tree, but when they struck him while he was praying, the sword melted like wax. After he finished his prayer, &quot;a Voice was heard from Heaven, calling the [[passion-bearer]] by his new name and summoning him to the heavenly Kingdom.&quot; [http://ocafs.oca.org/FeastSaintsViewer.asp?SID=4&amp;ID=1&amp;FSID=102099] He instructed the soldiers to rise from their knees where they had fallen in fear, and to complete the execution. After they followed his instruction, the olive tree became covered with fruit.<br />
<br />
Although his body was thrown into a fire, it came out unharmed and was buried by Christians. Some of his [[relics]] may be found at the [[Putna Monastery (Bucovina, Romania)]], as well as the Sts. Peter and Paul Cathedral in Constanta, Romania; his head is located at [[St. Panteleimon's Monastery (Athos)]]. <br />
<br />
&quot;St. Panteleimon is invoked in the prayers at the blessing of water and the blessing of oil, together with St. Hermolaus and the other unmercenaries and [[wonder-worker]]s.&quot; [http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/saints/panteleimon.htm] There is an [[Akathist]] hymn in his honor.<br />
<br />
==Hymns==<br />
[[Apolytikion]] (Third Tone) [http://goarch.org/en/chapel/saints.asp?contentid=143]<br />
<br />
:Panteleimon, saintly champion and healer,<br />
:[[intercession|intercede]] with our merciful God to grant our souls remission of sins.<br />
<br />
[[Kontakion]] (Plagal of the First Tone or Fifth Tone)<br />
<br />
:O Champion and Martyr of God, <br />
:imitating the Merciful and bearing from Him the grace of healing, <br />
:cure our spiritual ills by your prayers, <br />
:and set free from the temptation of the eternal enemy, <br />
:those who ceaselessly cry out, &quot;Save us, O Lord.&quot;<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://goarch.org/en/chapel/saints.asp?contentid=143 Panteleimon the Great Martyr]<br />
*[http://ocafs.oca.org/FeastSaintsViewer.asp?SID=4&amp;ID=1&amp;FSID=102099 Holy Greatmartyr and Healer Panteleimon]<br />
*[http://www.oca.org/FStropars.asp?SID=13&amp;ID=102099 Holy Greatmartyr and Healer Panteleimon (hymns)]<br />
*[http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/saints/panteleimon.htm Great Martyr and Healer Panteleimon]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Martyrs]]<br />
[[Category:Saints]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/HomosexualityHomosexuality2005-05-19T00:41:55Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{stub}}<br />
<br />
==Official Orthodox Statements==<br />
*[http://www.hellenicnews.com/readnews.html?newsid=811&amp;lang=US SCOBA's Statement on Homosexual Unions] <br />
*[http://www.copts.net/detail.asp?id=444 Statement from the Coptic Orthodox Church] <br />
*[http://orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/samesexunions.aspx On Same-Sex Unions] - Epistle of the Clergy of the Western Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (2004) <br />
<br />
==Articles from an Orthodox Perspective==<br />
*[http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/ethics/hopko_homosexual_christian.htm The Homosexual Christian] - by Fr. Thomas Hopko <br />
*[http://www.beliefnet.com/frameset.asp?pageLoc=/story/41/story_4187_1.html&amp;boardID=5444 Gays and the Orthodox Church: Can I still join the Church if I'm a homosexual?] - Fr. Ted Stylianopoulos<br />
*[http://htaoc.com/faith/library/articles/homosexuality.html Homosexuality and the Church] - by V. Rev. William Caldaroni<br />
*[http://www.holy-trinity.org/morality/homosexuality.html Orthodoxy, Homosexuality, the NCCC and the UFMCC] - From Holy-Trinity.org<br />
*[http://www.coptnet.com/Pope-Books/ordofwom/index.htm Homosexuality and the Church] - by H.H. Pope Shenouda III, also available in [http://www.coptnet.com/books/ordofwom.pdf PDF format] (495k)<br />
*[http://www.orthodox.net/russia/2000-08-17-homosexuality.html Christianity and Homosexuality: Russians Speak Out] by Srdja Trifkovic, August 17, 2000<br />
*[http://southern-orthodoxy.blogspot.com/2004/05/gay-but-not-funny.html Gay ... But Not Funny] by Fr. Joseph Huneycutt<br />
<br />
==Personal Testimonies==<br />
*[http://raphael.doxos.com/comments.php?id=524_0_1_0_C &quot;I was in Hell&quot;] - A light-bearing post from Huw Raphael<br />
<br />
==Non-Orthodox Sources==<br />
*[http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons] - from the Roman Catholic ''Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith''<br />
<br />
==Recommended Books==<br />
*''Straight &amp; Narrow: Compassion &amp; Clarity in the Homosexuality Debate'' by Thomas E. Schmidt. InterVarsity Press: 1995. (ISBN 0830818588)<br />
*''Homosexuality: A New Christian Ethic'' by Elizabeth R. Moberly. James Clarke Company: 1997. (ISBN 0227678508) (Orthodox author)<br />
<br />
==Other Resources==<br />
*[http://www.narth.com/ NARTH]<br />
*[http://www.exodusinternational.org/ Exodus International]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Ethics]]<br />
[[Category:Links]]</div>Vandronahttp://orthodoxwiki.org/MatinsMatins2005-05-19T00:25:23Z<p>Vandrona: </p>
<hr />
<div>Orthros is the longest and most complex of the daily cycle services. <br />
<br />
==Orthros Services==<br />
<br />
There are seven types of Orthros:<br />
<br />
==Basic Forms==<br />
<br />
*'''''Sunday Orthros:''''' the longest of the regular orthros services. If this service is celebrated in its entirety it can last up to three hours. It contains three canons, apart from any additional festal cannons which may be added. As a result, in most practical situations, abbreviations are made. Often, this Orthros is part of a vigil.<br />
<br />
*'''''Daily Orthros:''''' there is no Gospel. <br />
<br />
*'''''Feast-day Orthros''''' with Gospel. <br />
<br />
==Special Forms==<br />
<br />
*'''''Lenten Orthros:''''' penitential material added (hymns and prayers). <br />
<br />
Orthros services related to the Paschal feast:<br />
<br />
*'''''Great and Holy Friday Orthros:''''' there are twelve Gospel lessons; Antiphons are used (originating in a different office). The troparion sung at the 15th antiphon: Today is hung upon the cross... (Simeron krematai).<br />
<br />
*'''''Great and Holy Saturday Orthros'''''. This contains some elements of the old cathedral office: procession with epitaphios, reading of three pericopes (OT, epistle, Gospel) at the end.<br />
<br />
*'''''Paschal Orthros'''''. This is celebrated from Pascha Sunday until Thomas Sunday. The six psalms and the praises are not part of this service.<br />
<br />
{{stub}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Liturgics]]</div>Vandrona